MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382282725 · doi:10.1163/22119000-12340290

Special Issue: Critiques of Investment Arbitration Reform

2023· article· en· W4382282725 on OpenAlexaff
Gus Van Harten, Anil Yilmaz Vastardis

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of World Investment & Trade · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Arbitration and Investment Law
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArbitrationInvestment arbitrationInvestment (military)Compulsory arbitrationSign (mathematics)CriticismLaw and economicsPolitical scienceBusinessInternational investmentInvestment protectionLawEconomicsForeign direct investmentPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The last decade has seen escalating criticism of international investment arbitration. 1Even actors central to the functioning of the investment arbitration regime, and often profiting from it, now accept a need for change. 2Despite this vital debate, the number of arbitration claims each year is increasing and States continue to sign investment treaties with arbitration clauses.Moreover, in an apparent effort to salvage the treaties, insiders have taken leadership of the 'reform' discourse purportedly aimed at curing the regime's flaws. 3 Various reform initiatives are underway or have been introduced, most notably those of the UNCITRAL Working Group 1

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.901
Threshold uncertainty score0.933

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of World Investment & TradeSame topicInternational Arbitration and Investment LawFrench-language works237,207