Las normas sobre inversiones en la Asociación Trasatlántica de Comercio e Inversiones (TTIP): el riesgo de inseguridad jurídica de una regulación imprecisa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
espanolEl Tratado de la Asociacion Trasatlantica para el Comercio y la Inversion (TTIP), actualmente en negociacion entre Estados Unidos y la Union Europea, contiene normas de proteccion y liberalizacion de inversiones, cuyo contenido se inserta en la tradicion de los tratados bilaterales de inversion y del Tratado de Libre Comercio de America del Norte (NAFTA/TLCAN) entre Estados Unidos, Canada y Mexico. El analisis del contenido y consecuencias de tales normas muestra la inseguridad y los riesgos que plantean, a la luz de la experiencia de los tribunales arbitrales de inversion, cuya practica ha sido muy poco equilibrada y deberia llamar a la prudencia. EnglishThe Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), currently under negotiation between the United States and the European Union, contains standards of protection and investment liberalization, whose contents are inserted in the tradition of the bilateral investment treaties and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) between the United States, Canada and Mexico. The analysis of the contents and consequences of these standards shows the insecurity and the risks posed in the light of the experience of investment arbitration tribunals whose practice has been very unbalanced and should call for caution
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 | 0.016 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".