United Mexican States <i>v</i>. Burr and Others
Bibliographic record
Abstract
541 Arbitration — Jurisdiction — Admissibility — Treaties — North American Free Trade Agreement, 1994 — Treaty interpretation — Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969 — Effet utile doctrine — Whether one treaty interpretation technique dominating others Arbitration — Consent to arbitration — North American Free Trade Agreement, 1994 (“NAFTA”) — Pre-arbitration requirements under Article 1119 — Whether consent to arbitration conditioned upon fulfilment of Article 1119 requirements — Notice of intent — Purpose of notice of intent under Article 1119 of NAFTA — Whether defect in notice of intent vitiating consent under Article 1122 of NAFTA — Whether pre-arbitration procedural matters jurisdictional or admissibility issues — Standard and scope of review of tribunals’ decisions — International Commercial Arbitration Act 2017 Treaties — Interpretation — Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969 — Article 31(3) — Legal submissions as subsequent practice — Whether NAFTA Parties’ legal submission constituting subsequent practice under Article 31(3)(b) of Vienna Convention — Definition of subsequent practice — Jurisdictional error Relationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — North American Free Trade Agreement, 1994 — Decisions of international courts and tribunals — Decisions of Ontario Court of Appeal — Whether binding — Review of international arbitration awards — International Commercial Arbitration Act 2017 — Whether international arbitration tribunals acting within their authority — The law of Canada
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".