India’s Anti-Satellite Test: from the Perspective of International Space Law and the Law of Armed Conflict
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract To enhance their strategic position, some spacefaring States are engaged in exploiting legal lacunae of international space treaties. Consequently, there is an increase of militarization of outer space. As an instance of such activities, an anti-satellite ( asat ) test by India represents a strategic move to enhance its deterrence capability rather than earnestly adhering to international space law. Such actions can potentially increase the element of uncertainty in international law, particularly the international space law. The pursuit of military strategic interests in space has increased the possibility of an arms race in space. This article argues that asat tests not only violate certain principles of international law but also undermine the efforts for arms control and disarmament in the outer space. In this regard, an effective role of the international community is required to curb the arms race imperative for a safe and sustainable outer space environment.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".