MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4254376792 · doi:10.3138/utlj.61.1.037

DISTINCTIONS OF POWER AND THE POWER OF DISTINCTIONS: A RESPONSE TO PROFESSOR KOSKENNIEMI

2011· article· en· W4254376792 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Toronto Law Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSeventeenth-Century Political and Philosophical Thought
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpretation (philosophy)Rationalization (economics)Power (physics)EpistemologyContextualizationContext (archaeology)PhilosophyPretextLawEmpireSociologyPolitical scienceHistoryLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Professor Koskenniemi's erudite lecture, ‘Empire and International Law: The Real Spanish Contribution’ (UTLJ 61.1) examines the thinking of the Spanish scholastics from three perspectives. He offers a reconstructive interpretation of the reasoning that the Spanish scholastics engaged, a contextualization of the issues they took themselves to be addressing because of the context in which they wrote, and an account of the role that their reasoning served in subsequent rationalization of international law's indifference to private power. In this brief response, I say both something about the distinction between these perspectives and something about the Scholastics' signature distinction between the two forms of dominium, private property and public law.

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 categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.888
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.191 · 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