Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chapter 6 is an international legal examination of the status of The Hijaz in the aftermath of its conquest and absorption into a Saudi personal union. It discusses the impact of the 1933 Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States as well as the Territorial Principle. The Chapter tackles the legal question of secession and warns against the pitfalls of the ‘Self-Determination Trap’. It draws lessons from the difference between involuntary extinction of states as opposed to their creation. By looking at the cases of Czechoslovakia and Quebec it tackles the issue of ‘the Right to Secession by Agreement’. The Chapter reflects on lessons from Scotland, Catalan and Kurdistan highlighting that The Hijaz presents us with a delicate and nuanced understanding of ‘Internal Self-Determination’ and ‘Autonomy’ establishing, de facto, an international legal status of “Self-Determination Spectrum Disorder”. A special status calls for an active and special legal solution. The notion of a broader integrative role for The Hijaz and the broader Islamic world. The potential integrative institutionalization of The Hijaz is investigated bringing to bare a unique approach to self-determination that would entail coupling autonomy with international territorial administration. The propositions under this Chapter are supported by looking at other sui generis entities such as the Holy See being sovereigns without being states.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".