MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078457840 · doi:10.1163/157180802x00099

The Role of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf: A Technical Body in a Political World

2002· article· en· W2078457840 on OpenAlexaff
Ted L. McDorman

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicInternational Maritime Law Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContinental shelfCommissionUnited Nations Convention on the Law of the SeaLawPolitical sciencePoliticsConventionLaw of the seaState (computer science)International lawPublic international lawOceanographyGeologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf is a body created by the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention. The Commission was established as part of the careful compromises respecting Article 76 and the formula therein for the determination of the outer limits of the continental shelf. The purpose of this contribution is to explore what role the Law of the Sea Convention provides to the Commission when a coastal state seeks to establish the outer limit of the continental shelf under the Convention. The argument of this contribution is that the principal role of the Commission is as a legitimator of the claims of a coastal state and that this is a relatively modest role in what is essentially a boundary-making process that is political.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.143

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.037
Scholarly communication0.0360.010
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0090.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.219 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations109
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of Marine and Coastal LawSame topicInternational Maritime Law IssuesFrench-language works237,207