MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3173927866 · doi:10.1017/9781108675307.005

Legal Congruence with Existing Treaty Obligations: Toward Complementary or Competing Interests?

2021· book-chapter· en· W3173927866 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan L. Black-Branch

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2021
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicInternational Environmental Law and Policies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTreatyJurisdictionNegotiationStockpileNuclear weaponArms controlPolitical scienceLawBusinessLaw and economicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The text of the TPNW was agreed during a relatively short negotiation period. It includes comprehensive prohibitions regarding participation in any nuclear weapon activities, including undertakings not to develop, test, produce, acquire, possess, stockpile, use or threaten to use nuclear weapons. The Treaty prohibits the deployment of nuclear weapons on national territory and requires states parties to prevent and suppress any prohibited activity by persons within or on their territory or under their jurisdiction or control.

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.137

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0060.027
Scholarly communication0.0260.026
Open science0.0040.010
Research integrity0.0080.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.003

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.192 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicInternational Environmental Law and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207