MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Complete Journal

2019· article· en· W4248548456 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMexican Law Review · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Arbitration and Investment Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLawPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

of states. 39 Even with a lack of express obligation to do so, many domestic judges, in either monist or dualist countries, have interpreted domestic law in conformity with international rules and principles. 40 Consistent interpretation can render dualist systems, like Mexico's, monist in some sense 41 through the oeuvre of domestic judges.In fact, through consistent interpretation, domestic judges can use international law instruments not incorporated or otherwise received in their respective domestic legal order, so as to shape the meaning of national legal norms and principles. 42 Domestic judges use the "consistent interpretation" technique with more frequency when they have to apply domestic legal provisions to human rights protection.In fact, national judges, particularly those working in Supreme and Constitutional Courts, always try to show that their interpretations of human rights, granted by internal norms and principles, are in conformity with international human rights instruments. 43 Mexican judges are not separate from this global judicial movement toward consistent interpretation of domestic law with international human rights law.In some case law decisions, Mexican judges have interpreted national legal provisions in accordance with international human rights instruments.In 2008, a circuit tribunal considered that the illegal deprivation of liberty is contrary to Articles 1, 14, 16, 103 and 107 of the Mexican Constitution, and must be interpreted in accordance with international human rights esp.paras.8-9), all the domestic judges of EU member States have the obligation to interpret domestic law in conformity with EU Law. 39Thus, for example, Article 10-2 of the Spanish Constitution expressly states that constitutional human rights provisions shall be interpreted in conformity with international human rights treaties ratified by Spain. 40 See, for example: Supreme Court of Canada, Baker, [1999] 2 SCR 817, House of Lords of the UK, A (FC) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (Conjoined Appeals) (2005) UKHL 71; Israeli Supreme Court, Kav La'oved Association v. Israel, HCJ 4542/02; ILDC 382 (IL2006) [37]. 41eL Boudouhi, Supra, 294. 42Jean d'aspreMont, the systeMic integration of internationaL Law By doMestic courts: doMestic Judges as architects of the consistency of the internationaL Le-gaL order, in oLe kristian fauchaLd and andré noLLkaeMper,

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.009

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.224 · 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