Canada v. United States of America (Judgment of the Chamber of the International Court of Justice, 12 October 1984)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The case analysed in this chapter concerned delimitation of a single maritime boundary in the ‘Gulf of Maine area’. The Gulf is a broad oceanic indentation in the eastern coast of the North American continent, roughly the shape of an elongated rectangle, and bordered on three sides by land and on the fourth by the open Atlantic Ocean. The role of political and economic considerations in the delimitation process is discussed. This was a case of many firsts: the first delimitation dispute (indeed, the first dispute of any kind) to be referred to a Chamber of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) under Article 26(2) of the ICJ Statute; the first maritime boundary case to be decided after the adoption of UNCLOS; the first time the court had been asked to delimit a single maritime boundary encompassing the continental shelf and exclusive fishery zones; and the first time the court had been charged not just with the enunciation of principles and methods, but also with the delimitation of an actual boundary line. The chapter concludes that the judgment provides a valuable example of the application of three leading methods of delimitation (bisector, adjusted median line, and perpendicular) over the boundary’s three sectors.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.003 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".