MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366716965 · doi:10.54254/2753-7048/3/2022579

The Impact of Domestic Law on International Law

2023· article· en· W4366716965 on OpenAlexaff
Tianci Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueLecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public Media · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Arbitration and Investment Law
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMunicipal lawPrivate lawPublic lawLawComparative lawCommercial lawPublic international lawCivil law (Civil law)Political scienceInternational law

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The birth of international law falls behind domestic law, therefore as a developing legal system, international law is naturally influenced by the more mature domestic law system, both in terms of domestic public law and domestic private law. Modern international law is essentially international law with a sense of domestic private law, but the increasingly frequent and complex international interactions required the establishment of a hierarchical and centralized structure shown in domestic public law. The development of international law by drawing on domestic public law faces certain obstacles and poses risks that should be given due attention. This study starts with the theoretical foundation of domestic law influencing international law, in both private and public sense, followed by analyses of real-world practice, and concluded with the major issues such as the different interpretations of equality in domestic and international laws. This article concludes that international law was first developed based on domestic private law with a focus on equality, and then shifted towards domestic public law by emphasizing hierarchy and centralization. International constitutionalism is also discussed in this study using some judgements made by the International Court of Justice.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.592
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public MediaSame topicInternational Arbitration and Investment LawFrench-language works237,207