MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313023165 · doi:10.15581/010.15.28499

Cuestiones actuales referentes al uso de la fuerza en el Derecho Internacional

2018· article· es· W4313023165 on OpenAlexaff
Romualdo Bermejo García

Bibliographic record

VenueAnuario español de derecho internacional/Anuario español de derecho internacional · 2018
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Law and Human Rights
Canadian institutionsBombardier (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesDerechoPolitical scienceGeographyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I. INTRODUCCIÓN.- II. LA ACTUACIÓN DEL CONSEJO DE SEGURIDAD EN LOS ÚLTIMOS CONFLICTOS ARMADOS Y EL CAPÍTULO VII DE LA CARTA DE LA ONU: 1. ¿Discrecionalidad o arbitrariedad del Consejo de Seguridad en el ámbito del artículo 39 de la Carta? 2. La ampliación del concepto de "amenaza a la paz" ¿ficción o realidad? 3. Las acciones armadas por razones humanitarias y la cuestión del doble rasero. 4. El terrorismo internacional. 5. El Consejo de Seguridad y el Capítulo VII de la Carta. ¿Aplicación efectiva o violación despiadada? 6. ¿Es posible un control de la legalidad de los actos del Consejo de Seguridad?- III. EL DERECHO INTERNACIONAL Y LA AMENAZA O EL USO DEL ARMA NUCLEAR: 1. El Derecho internacional en materia de uso de la fuerza y el arma nuclear. 2. La amenaza o el uso del arma nuclear en caso de legítima defensa.- IV. LA GUERRA DE KOSOVO Y EL DERECHO INTERNACIONAL: LA ONU EN UN ATOLLADERO: 1. Causas y orígenes del conflicto. 2. La respuesta de la comunidad internacional hasta el inicio de los bombardeos. 3. La acción armada de la OTAN contra Yugoslavia: ¿legal, ilegal, justa y legal o justa pero ilegal?- V. CONCLUSIÓN.

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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.647
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0070.002
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.005

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.351 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnuario español de derecho internacional/Anuario español de derecho internacionalSame topicInternational Law and Human RightsFrench-language works237,207