MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2302373232

Potential Liability for Climate-Related Measures Under the Trans-Pacific Partnership

2014· article· en· W2302373232 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Meredith Wilensky

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEnvironmental law and policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternational tradeTreatyLiabilityGeneral partnershipIntellectual propertyInvestment (military)GlobalizationGovernment (linguistics)BusinessTrade agreementInternational economicsFree tradePolitical scienceEconomicsFinance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Trans-Pacific Partnership Trade and Globalization Agreement (TPP) is currently being negotiated by 12 Pacific Rim countries: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States, and Vietnam. With 29 chapters, the TPP addresses much more than trade, setting binding policy related to investment, intellectual property, technological barriers to trade, and the environment. If negotiations are successful, this mega-treaty will be the largest free trade agreement to date, initially governing 40 percent of the world's GDP and 26 percent of the world's trade. The agreement will be open for other Pacific Rim countries to join over time. Many scholars have expressed concern that fair trade agreements (FTAs) and other international investment agreements (IIAs) create a threat of government liability for measures taken to combat climate change. This white paper addresses whether the TPP investment chapter adequately shields governments from risk of liability for climate change policies.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0130.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicEnvironmental law and policyFrench-language works237,207