MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943055067

The geopolitics of the Northwest Passage in an international relations perspective

2017· article· en· W2943055067 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Frédèric Lasserre

Bibliographic record

VenueRelations internationales · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeopoliticsSovereigntySubject (documents)MirroringInclusion (mineral)Political scienceArcticThe arcticInterpretation (philosophy)International relationsPerspective (graphical)EconomyPolitical economySociologyLawOceanographyEconomicsSocial sciencePoliticsGeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The status of the Northwest Passage waters fundamentally raises the question of the inclusion or not of this maritime strait in the sovereign maritime area claimed by Canada. Mirroring the issue of the Northeast Passage, it opposes an interpretation of the status of the passage as an international strait, open to the transit of any vessel under the rules of innocent passage, with the inclusion of the strait in Canadian internal waters, thus subject to the full sovereignty of the latter. With climate change, a rich media and scientific discourse developed on the potential strategic interest of the Northwest Passage: its actual opening would, according to several researchers, upset states’ Arctic strategies, as it would free up significantly shorter shipping routes. It turns out, however, that relations between states remain cordial on the subject, despite disagreements. The issue of the Northwest Passage did not result in the emergence of a strong dispute between Canada and other countries on the sovereignty over this potential Arctic route.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.788
Threshold uncertainty score0.422

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0100.022
Scholarly communication0.0130.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRelations internationalesSame topicArctic and Russian Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207