MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2172491201 · doi:10.1093/icsidreview/siv018

St Mary’s VCNA, LLC v The Government of Canada

2015· article· en· W2172491201 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Todd Weiler

Bibliographic record

VenueICSID Review - Foreign Investment Law Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Arbitration and Investment Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTribunalArbitrationLawGovernment (linguistics)TreatyPrivilege (computing)International arbitrationPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On 13 March 2013, a Consent Award was issued in the case of St Mary’s VCNA, LLC v Government of Canada—a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) arbitration established under the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Arbitration Rules (1976). The brief award, rendered by a Tribunal composed of Richard Stewart, Brigitte Stern and Michael Pryles (presiding),3 recounted the parties’ agreement that the claims would be irrevocably abandoned in exchange for the Government’s commitment not to seek reimbursement for its costs in the matter. The parties’ agreement was reached just a few months after the Honourable Mr James Spigelman, AC, QC, former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Australia), issued a report indicating that documents inadvertently disclosed by the Claimant, during pre-hearing document production, could be retained and used by the Government in the arbitration, notwithstanding a claim of solicitor client privilege made with respect to them. It was said that the documents reflected communications between Claimant and counsel, relating to the issue of whether it had taken steps to manufacture the NAFTA standing after the conduct giving rise to the claim had already occurred.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.353

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0110.004
Scholarly communication0.0090.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0080.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.003

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueICSID Review - Foreign Investment Law JournalSame topicInternational Arbitration and Investment LawFrench-language works237,207