Bibliographic record
Abstract
IV.The identification of customary international law 1.The role of normative considerations in the identification of customary international law a.The scoping of the topic by the Special Rapporteur b.The adopted draft conclusions aa.The recognition of normative considerations bb.The relationship between customary international law and treaties 2. Concluding observations: normative considerations addressed with caution V. Peremptory norms of general international law (Jus cogens) VI.General Principles of Law 1.General Principles of Law in the progressive development and codification 2. The new topic of General Principles of Law a. Overview of the draft conclusions b.Comments and reflections on the draft conclusions D. Concluding Observations Chapter 7: Concluding observations on the institutional perspectives D. Perspectives in different fields of international law Chapter 8: The European Convention on Human Rights A. Introduction B. The interpretation of the ECHR I.The European Court's approach to interpretation II.Relating the European Court's practice to the general rules of interpretation III.Recourse to other rules and principles of international law for content-determination C. Interpretative decisions in establishing the interrelationship I.The construction of establishing a relation between the European Convention and other principles and rules of international law 1.Incorporation by proportionality analysis 2. Proportionality analysis and customary international law a.Two different constructions
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.771 | 0.783 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".