MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391436612 · doi:10.1017/ilm.2024.1

Briefly Noted

2024· article· en· W4391436612 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Legal Materials · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Law and Human Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTortureLawPolitical sciencePunishment (psychology)CommitDissenting opinionConventionDeclarationAmnestyStatuteEconomic JusticeHuman rightsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On November 16, 2023, the International Court of Justice voted 13 – 2 in favor of issuing a binding Order in the case of Canada and the Netherlands v. Syrian Arab Republic. The Order adopted two provisional measures, which require Syria to prevent acts of torture and other cruel punishment, ensure that its officials and organizations do not commit torture or other cruel punishments, and preserve any evidence related to the allegations of the case. A Request for the Indication of Provisional Measures seeking such an order had been entered on June 8, 2023, by Canada and the Netherlands, for which oral arguments were held on October 10, 2023. The Request came alongside Canada's and the Netherlands' Joint Application instituting proceedings against Syria for violations of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. The Request and Application were made pursuant to Articles 36 and 41 of the Statute of the Court, Article 30 of the Convention against Torture, and Articles 73, 74, and 75 of the Rules of the Court. Vice-President Gevorgian and Judge Xue voted against both provisional measures, with Vice-President Gevorgian appending a dissenting opinion and Judge Xue appending a declaration.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.413
Threshold uncertainty score0.838

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.4130.262

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Legal MaterialsSame topicInternational Law and Human RightsFrench-language works237,207