MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127695159 · doi:10.1163/18719732-12341454

Activists on the High Seas: Reinventing International Law from the Mare Liberum?

2021· article· en· W3127695159 on OpenAlex
Frédéric Megret

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Community Law Review · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicInternational Maritime Law Issues
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic international lawInternational lawInterpretation (philosophy)LawInternational watersMonopolyEnforcementPolitical scienceAction (physics)Law of the seaSociologyEconomicsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article discusses the implications of a modality of civil society activism involving direct action in the High Seas. It focuses on three case studies: Sea Shepherd, SOS Méditérannée, and Women on Waves. All three directly challenge states’ claimed monopoly on the enforcement but also the interpretation and production of international law. They insist that they have stepped in only to fill a gap left by states’ inattention to their obligations. The article examines how their authority to do so is and might be justified, and whether it is emblematic of broader developments in international law that are merely made particularly visible on the High Seas.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.002

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 head0.288
Teacher spread0.252 · 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