MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Ottawa Convention on Anti-Personnel Landmines

2013· book· en· W2626982656 on OpenAlexaffabout
John English

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2013
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Law and Aviation
Canadian institutionsCanadian Forces College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConventionAeronauticsPolitical scienceEngineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article discusses the Ottawa Treaty or, as it is properly known, the Convention on the Prohibition on the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction, which was signed by 122 governments in Ottawa, Canada, on 3–4 December 1997. By November 2011, there were 158 states parties to the agreement. The landmine treaty has saved lives, opened fields, and inspired change in international institutions. The NGOs created the Landmine Monitor, which has reported yearly on the substantial progress made in clearing minefields and preventing the export and production of mines. In 2009 only one nation, Myanmar, still used mines, and the number of producing nations had fallen from over forty to an estimated four. The number of deaths and serious wounds has dropped dramatically since 1997. The shame of defying the treaty made nearly all non-signatories compliant with the Ottawa aims. The United States, while refusing to sign the convention, became the leading funder for mine eradication.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.873

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooksSame topicInternational Law and AviationFrench-language works237,207