On Jurisdiction of the State of Aircraft Landing——From the Perspective of the Montreal Protocol of 2014
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As an indispensible part of the jurisdiction system of international civil aviation security conventions,jurisdiction of the state of aircraft landing has increasingly aroused general concern among the ICAO and its member states. The Montreal Protocol of 2014 has practical significance in providing a jurisdiction basis for the state of landing and preventing and curing the illegal acts on board aircraft. However,how to define its nature and whether there's theoretical conflict between it and the territorial jurisdiction of the state of aircraft registration remain controversial. As the establishing of jurisdiction of the state of landing has more advantages than its disadvantages,we should focus on scientific connection and coordination of domestic aviation legislations with this new provision. Our Aviation Law should work along with both substantive and procedural lines,by transforming offenses and defining delivery subjects to intensify the punishment to criminal acts on board aircraft and ensure the safe operation of air transport.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".