MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3002219951

Moving the Goal Post! How Some NAFTA Tribunals Have Challenged the FTC Note of Interpretation on the Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard Under NAFTA Article 1105

2014· article· en· W3002219951 on OpenAlexaff
Patrick Dumberry

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Arbitration and Investment Law
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTribunalArbitrationScope (computer science)Interpretation (philosophy)Free trade agreementPolitical scienceMeaning (existential)State (computer science)Law and economicsLawFree tradeEconomicsInternational trade
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Article 1105 of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) provides that NAFTA Parties must accord to investments of investors treatment “in accordance with international law, including fair and equitable treatment” (“FET”). In the last two decades, Article 1105 has undoubtedly become the most controversial and contested provision of NAFTA Chapter 11. In the words of one writer, “Article 1105 has become the alpha and omega of investor-state arbitration under Chapter 11 of NAFTA.” The FET debate started when three controversial awards were rendered in 2000 on the scope and meaning of Article 1105. The Pope & Talbot tribunal held, inter alia, that Article 1105 requires the application of the FET standard independently (and in addition) to the minimum standard of treatment under international law.

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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score0.455

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 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

Citations16
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicInternational Arbitration and Investment LawFrench-language works237,207