Resolution at the Intersection of Sovereignty and Security in the Northwest Passage Dispute: 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
Continental security requires resolution of the United States-Canada Northwest Passage disagreement. This article builds upon Ted McDorman’s emphasis on the different positions of the two nations and asserts that there is a pressing need for a solution regarding the Passage that is rooted in bilateral cooperation. In this era of accelerated climate change and increased access to the waters of North America’s High Arctic, as well as the uncertain future of an increasingly alliance-skeptical United States in some influential circles and the rapidly moving international tensions, uncertainty surrounds the issue. A resolution at the intersection of sovereignty and security in the Northwest Passage dispute rejects an absolutist approach to sovereignty or precedent, and instead recognizes Canadian sovereignty to the Passage, allowing it to close off the Passage to any hostile forces, while allowing the Americans access to the Passage to protect the continent. It is a cooperative United States–Canada arrangement that will secure the continent for both countries.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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