MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210455292 · doi:10.1093/jiel/jgac008

The Strategies of the International Chamber of Commerce to Eliminate Double Taxation

2022· article· en· W4210455292 on OpenAlexaff
Ksenia Polonskaya

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of International Economic Law · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEuropean Political History Analysis
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeagueContext (archaeology)MacroInternational taxationLaw and economicsEconomicsPolitical scienceLawSociologyTax reformComputer scienceHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This article focuses on the role of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) in developing the regime on the elimination of double taxation in the twentieth century. The objective of the article is to determine the ICC’s strategies and its structural advantages in developing the regime and contextualize these strategies in a broader socio-legal and historical context. The article adopts the interactional theory of Jutta Brunée and Stephan Toope to emphasize the actor-oriented outlook upon the development of the regime on double taxation. It relies on the micro-and macro-histories teased out from archival sources, biographies of prominent decision-makers, and deliberations of committee members in the League of Nations and the United Nations. The article concludes that the ICC is a strategic player within the community of practice in the international tax regime, which utilized its structural advantages and employed different strategies to facilitate the elimination of double taxation.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.011
Scholarly communication0.0180.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.218 · 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
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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of International Economic LawSame topicEuropean Political History AnalysisFrench-language works237,207