MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3175194499

Climate Change and Sea-Level Rise: Is the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea Up to the Task?

2020· article· en· W3175194499 on OpenAlexaff
Vladyslav Lanovoy, Sally O’Donnell

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicInternational Maritime Law Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnited Nations Convention on the Law of the SeaLaw of the seaSea level riseConventionLawClimate changeTask (project management)Political scienceMaritime boundaryInterpretation (philosophy)Sea levelKey (lock)International lawGeographyMunicipal lawOceanographyEconomicsPhysical geographyComputer scienceGeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the challenges that climate change and sea-level rise pose to certain key aspects of the law of the sea. Sea-level rise is likely to impact maritime baselines, the qualification of maritime features and the entitlements they generate, and ultimately the stability of maritime boundaries, which are critical for the peaceful co-existence of sovereign States. This article examines whether some of the relevant provisions of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea can accommodate a liberal interpretation so as to provide some, even if incomplete, answers to the challenges posed by sea-level rise to the law of the sea regime. It is argued that the legal fiction of permanency that underpins key aspects of the law of the sea, and thus ignores future physical changes to coastlines, is the most appropriate temporary solution, unless and until new rules are agreed by States to deal comprehensively with sea-level rise.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.016
Scholarly communication0.0110.012
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0100.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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 venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicInternational Maritime Law IssuesFrench-language works237,207