MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W259991518

On International Law of Treaty Interpretation SUR LE DROIT INTERNATIONAL DE L'INTERPRÉTATION DES TRAITÉS

2010· article· fr· W259991518 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zhang Naigen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian social science · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWorld Trade Organization Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVienna Convention on the Law of TreatiesTreatyLawInternational courtInterpretation (philosophy)Political scienceInternational lawPublic international lawViewpointsSettlement (finance)EconomicsPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Treaty interpretation means that a treaty is interpreted in course of implementation and application after it has entered into force. The rules of treaty interpretation of 1969 Vienna Convention on Law of Treaty (VCLT) were expressly applied to dispute settlement by International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 1994 case of Territorial Dispute (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya v. Chad), and then by Appellate Body of Dispute Settlement of World Settlement of World (WTO) in 1996 case of United States - Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline as the customary rules of interpretation of public international law. This article is mainly based on leading cases of ICJ and WTO in last decade to offer a systematic analysis of treaty interpretation in practices of contemporary international laws and to discuss some theoretical issues regarding rules, methods and approaches of treaty interpretation with some viewpoints of International Law Commission's Commentaries on VCLT and of well-known international lawyers.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.725
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.258 · 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.

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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian social scienceSame topicWorld Trade Organization LawFrench-language works237,207