MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112759948 · doi:10.23880/abca-16000136

The Arctic Ocean Melt and the Impacts in Traditional Populations: Possibilities for an International Guarantee

2020· article· en· W3112759948 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maraluce María Custódio

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Bioethics & Clinical Applications · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJurisdictionUnavailabilityThe arcticArcticPolitical scienceBalance (ability)International lawLawGeographyEnvironmental planningEcologyPsychologyEngineeringOceanographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The research intends to show how the melting of the Arctic Ocean, caused by the climatic collapse, affects the life of the traditional populations that inhabit the region and its ways of being influenced by the changes of the landscape and of the own structure and environmental availability. In view of this, it aims to present the environmental balance as a Human Right and, in view of this position, demonstrate the need for international mobilization to protect traditional communities that are historically more vulnerable. In order to do so, the study questions the possibility of universal jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, since the litigation previously raised by the Inuit people was frustrated due to the unavailability of the non-jurisdictional countries. In addition, the possibility of litigation is also raised in the International Criminal Court, on the grounds of Ecocide. Thus, through the hypothetical-deductive method and the questions raised by Cloutier SW, et al. [1], the impacts of climate collapse on vulnerable populations will be demonstrated, with a dissertation on the imperative need of effective and sensitive international tutelage - which also justifies the research.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.017
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.530
GPT teacher head0.539
Teacher spread0.009 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Bioethics & Clinical ApplicationsSame topicArctic and Russian Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207