MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2473192715 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v9n5p194

Study of the Legal Regime of Oil and Gas Transit in Energy Charter Treaty and Law of Iran

2016· article· en· W2473192715 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abdolsamad Doulah, Mirshahbiz Shafee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicInternational Environmental Law and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharterLawTreatyPolitical scienceEnergy lawEnvironmental law

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present thesis has analyzed the legal regime of oil and gas transit in energy charter treaty and law of Iran by the use of descriptive analytic method. The research findings show that the law of transportation and the transit of foreign goods through the Islamic Republic of Iran’s territory passed in 1995 and its executive by law generally deals with the transit affairs although because of its general application it can be stated that it includes energy transit especially oil and gas. This law has referred to the energy transit in a limited way and therefore the lack of law in this respect is quite conspicuous. The transportation law of Iran which was ratified about 14 years ago and since it was codified for the needs of those days need to be revised in case Iran intends to join the charter because in several cases there is lack of law. But despite the legal vacuum there is no contrast between the aforementioned law and the contents of the charter treaty in terms of the oil and gas transit. In fact it can be stated that the law of transportation of Iran has no limitation in accepting the contents of the charter but only in some cases for the sake of clarification and preventing the creation of difference some new rules need to be ratified and some of the present rules need to be modified.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.873
Threshold uncertainty score0.733

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Politics and LawSame topicInternational Environmental Law and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207