MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3175402783 · doi:10.7202/1079429ar

Calling for Compliance. Transnational Advocacy Networks in the Mediterranean Sea. A Case Study on Norm Compliance at Europe’s Liquid Borders

2021· article· en· W3175402783 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Julia Lindner

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue québécoise de droit international · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean Union Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNorm (philosophy)Multinational corporationCompliance (psychology)European unionMember statesPolitical sciencePoliticsPolitical economyPublic administrationInternational tradeBusinessLawSociologySocial psychologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper observes compliance theories on transnational advocacy networks in the Mediterranean Sea; a multinational border region being widely considered as the “deadliest border” in the world. This situation has led to a measurable “rush to the sea” of organisations which belong to Transnational Advocacy Networks (TAN) or define themselves as “humanitarians”. Part of today’s theory on the impact of transnational advocacy networks is that consistent and continuous engagement of TAN leads to increased norm commitment and even norm compliance in states with strong institutions. However, after the implementation of a system of bilateral treaties (2017 Italy - Libya, 2016 Turkey and European Union (EU)) 1 by the EU, the number of travellers reaching EU soil has significantly decreased. Additionally, changing political circumstances in Libya and internal policies of EU member states have contributed to lowering the number of arrivals.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.895
Threshold uncertainty score0.919

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue québécoise de droit internationalSame topicEuropean Union Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207