The 1999 Pacific Salmon Agreement: An Essay in Honor of Ted L. McDorman
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1999 an agreement was concluded between Canada and the United States on amendments to the 1985 Pacific Salmon Treaty which brought to an end a period of prolonged dispute and hostility over the management of salmon by the two countries and paved the way for a period of amicable relations on the issue that has lasted to this day. The negotiation of the agreement and the outcome were marked by two important characteristics: The negotiating process deviated from traditional state-to-state negotiations, and the ultimate agreement expressed the obligations of the parties not in simple verbal form but rather as the outcome of complex formulae designed to determine abundance and the sharing consequences. The key to the negotiation was fisheries scientists agreeing on the appropriate formula. This article seeks to reflect on two aspects of the negotiation of the 1999 agreement identified by Ted McDorman: first, the process as a mechanism for negotiating international agreements; and second, the broader implications of the “scientific complexity” of the agreement—the integration of law, science, and technology.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 it