Journal of the History of International Law Revue d'histoire du droit international
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Journal of the History of International Law / Revue d'histoire du droit international (JHIL) is an interdisciplinary journal on the history of international law with a broad outreach.It is placed among the top international law journals which are regularly consulted by all international lawyers with a general interest in the history of their field.It provides a forum for the emerging and expanding scholarship that takes a historical approach to exploring a wide range of issues in international law.It accommodates the growth in interest in the histories of international law from scholars working in related fields (such as global history, imperial history, intellectual history and international relations).It creates a venue for ground-breaking work in this field by combining tradition with innovation and to provide the opportunity to develop sustained critical engagement with work on the history of international law.The Journal of the History of International Law / Revue d'histoire du droit international encourages critical reflection on the classical grand narrative of international law as the purveyor of peace and civilisation to the whole world.It specifically invites articles on extra-European experiences and forms of legal relations between autonomous communities which were discontinued as a result of domination and colonisation by European Powers.It is open to all possibilities of telling the history of international law, while respecting the necessary rigour in the use of records and sources.It is a forum for a plurality of visions of the history of international law, but also for debate on such plurality itself, on the methods, topics, and usages, as well as the bounds and dead-ends of this discipline.Moreover, it devotes space to examining in greater depth specific themes.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it