Resolving the Un-Delimited Arctic Boundary Between Canada and the United States in the Beaufort Sea by Using a Law-and-Science Approach
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Fewer than half of the 500 or so potential maritime boundaries in the world have been agreed, creating uncertainty not only for the coastal States involved but also for their investors active in the offshore oil and gas industry. The complex process of agreeing and fixing boundaries or of making provisional arrangements can be time-consuming and expensive but once agreed can significantly contribute to the economic wealth of the affected countries. Disputes over maritime boundaries regularly flare up around the world and sometimes result in skirmishes. Coastal States with competing claims to maritime areas routinely offer and award oil concessions in disputed waters without the investors taking blocks being fully aware of the underlying inter-State dispute and the risks presented by an un-delimited boundary, especially one featuring straddling deposits. Indeed, maritime boundary disputes form a misunderstood and frequently overlooked area of investment risk management in the energy sector. The Figure below shows, in red lines, the limit of the Exclusive Economic Zones ("EEZs") of the world, together with maritime boundaries delimited by treaty (depicted by blue lines) and interpreted "strict equidistance" lines in locations where no current delimited maritime boundary exists (shown in orange). The world's EEZ waters, as measured from coastlines (in black) up to the EEZ legal limit (in red), cover approximately 169,000,000 square kilometers (geodetic).
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it