MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2493744379 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v9n6p219

Consequences, Necessities and Advantages of Iran’ Accession to the Statute of International Criminal Court

2016· article· en· W2493744379 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abu Mohammad Asgarkhani, Iraj Goldouzian, Behzad Dorraj

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Sanctions and International Relations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatuteAccessionLawPolitical scienceParliamentSovereigntyStatute of limitationsIslamCriminal courtRome Statute of the International Criminal CourtInternational lawEuropean unionBusinessInternational tradePoliticsHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The existing conflicts between approval of Rome Statute by Islamic Consultative Assembly along with joining the International Criminal Court and national interests and some of Islamic laws and regulations, has always been a controversial issue among scholars of law community of Iran because of the establishment of International Criminal Court and signed the Rome Statute by Islamic Republic of Iran. Many believe that accession to the International Criminal Court and its approval by parliament is inconsistent with national interests and sovereignty and also would bring negative consequences to the country. Contrary to this view, it is believed that provisions of the Rome Statute are not inconsistent with Islamic and domestic regulations and this accession can bring positive outcomes and international interests to Iran. In this way, national power and sovereignty of country would be reinforced at international level. The present study has investigated positive consequences and advantages of Iran’s accession to the Rome Statute.

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 score0.623
Threshold uncertainty score0.152

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Politics and LawSame topicEconomic Sanctions and International RelationsFrench-language works237,207