MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2191047990 · doi:10.54648/eelr2015007

Science-based Risk Regulation under the SPS Agreement of the WTO: An Appraisal Post-<i>US/Canada Continued Suspension of Obligations in the EC-Hormones</i> Dispute

2015· article· en· W2191047990 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
S. Subramanian

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Energy and Environmental Law Review · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWorld Trade Organization Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiscretionScope (computer science)JurisprudencePolitical scienceHuman rightsCompromiseLaw and economicsLawTRIPS AgreementAgreementIndeterminacy (philosophy)EconomicsComputer scienceIntellectual property

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: The SPS Agreement is the result of a negotiated compromise between the minimization of negative trade effects and the protection of human, animal, and plant life or health. These seemingly contradictory purposes along with the textual indeterminacy of the agreement led to several interpretative challenges during the dispute settlement process, resulting in the development of the rich jurisprudence under the SPS agreement. It is in this connection, this study seeks to examine the major rulings under the SPS agreement for evaluation of the scope of regulatory discretion vested with the national authorities to establish the appropriate level of protection vis-á-vis the basic rights and obligations of the member states. The study summarizes the key achievements of the SPS case-laws in the progressive development of the SPS regime.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.201
Threshold uncertainty score0.455

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.018
Scholarly communication0.0140.002
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.215 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Energy and Environmental Law ReviewSame topicWorld Trade Organization LawFrench-language works237,207