Bibliographic record
Abstract
At its twelfth Air Navigation Conference (AN-Conf/12) held in Montréal, from 19 to 30 November 2012, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) introduced its Global Air Navigation Capacity and Efficiency Plan (GANP) for the period 2013 to 2028.The Plan is meant to be approved by the ICAO Assembly at its sessions every three years. This is the fourth such Plan adopted by ICAO over the years and is based on operational objectives agreed upon by States and the aviation industry. It provides for a rolling fifteen year strategic methodology and introduces Aviation System Block Upgrades (ASBUs), each of which has a five year time scale. The ASBUs are not overarching, nor are they an umbrella system but remain flexible modules that can be used by States in accordance with their individual operational needs. One of the salient characteristics of ASBUs is that they define technologies and procedures that are calculated to improve operational performance, particularly when the need arises for an operational problem to be solved. The ultimate aim is to achieve global harmonization and interoperability of air navigation. ASBUs are based on flexibility and collaboration and as such are not mandatory requirements imposed on States. However, their importance and potential contribution to aviation safety were highlighted at the 38th Session of the ICAO Assembly held in the last quarter of 2013. In this context, this article discusses GANP and ASBUs and inquires into the legal regime applicable to the ASBUs and States' obligations pertaining thereto.
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 | 0.025 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.020 | 0.017 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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.
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".