The Role of International Cooperation in Demarcation of Territorial Boundaries in International Law and Procedures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Non-judicial developments in the field of boundary issues, with the aim of achieving stability and preserve it, move toward the ideal of international community. The ideal is to maintain international peace, order and security. Developments and advances are in the service of this ideal and countries take steps in this direction with responsibility than before and with believe in integrity of international peace, order and security, and apply technical and human progresses in this way. International organizations and countries, as the main subjects of international law, with understanding adverse consequences of instability, use all the tools necessary to achieve this goal and non-judicial developments occurring in delimitation of international territorial boundaries, are in line with this excellent goal. Today, countries cooperate wider than past in different ways and in all fields including boundary issues. Deep understanding toward the importance of international peace, order and security and legal belief to necessity of such cooperation, undoubtedly have facilitate today direction. Of course, the role of international institutions and organizations was very dramatic in developing such belief.
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 | 0.042 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.076 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.017 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".