MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168104321 · doi:10.1017/s0032247407007127

Arctic shipping guidelines: towards a legal regime for navigation safety and environmental protection?

2008· article· en· W2168104321 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Øystein Jensen

Bibliographic record

VenuePolar Record · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTransport Canada
KeywordsArcticThe arcticContext (archaeology)Key (lock)Relevance (law)Environmental planningPolitical scienceBusinessEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental protectionEnvironmental scienceGeographyOceanographyComputer scienceLawComputer securityGeologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT With the International Polar Year (IPY) having commenced in March 2007, key issues relating to the polar regions are again in focus. This article reviews one central legal issue re-emerging in the Arctic: global regulation of safety standards for international shipping. The ‘Guidelines for ships operating in Arctic ice-covered waters’ are examined, with a view to the probable expansion of shipping in the Arctic in near future. Following an introduction to navigational issues within the Arctic context, the article describes how the guidelines came into being, and then analyses key elements and structure of the regulations and shortfalls of today's arrangements. The possible relevance of the guidelines to the Antarctic is also discussed briefly. Finally, the article inquires into the key repercussions of introducing binding regulations.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.134

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.007
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations30
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolar RecordSame topicArctic and Russian Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207