MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406194324 · doi:10.58578/yasin.v5i1.4613

Peran dan Tantangan International Criminal Court (ICC) dalam Percobaan Perdamaian Konflik Israel-Palestina

2025· article· en· W4406194324 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueYASIN · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAsian Geopolitics and Ethnography
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCriminal courtPolitical scienceCriminologyLawSociologyInternational law

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The International Criminal Court (ICC) plays a strategic role in upholding international law, particularly in addressing grave crimes such as genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. In the context of the Israel-Palestine conflict, the ICC serves as an independent body offering hope to Palestine in seeking accountability for alleged human rights violations committed by Israel. This study analyzes the ICC’s role in the conflict and identifies the challenges it faces. The findings reveal that the ICC’s jurisdiction, as stipulated by the Rome Statute, encounters significant obstacles, particularly as Israel has not ratified the Rome Statute and firmly rejects the ICC’s authority. Conversely, Palestine, a member of the ICC since April 2015, has sought to utilize international legal mechanisms to pursue justice. The study concludes that while the ICC has considerable potential to enforce justice, legal and political challenges such as the refusal of cooperation by accused parties and the complex geopolitical dynamics limit its effectiveness. This research provides critical insights into the ICC’s role and challenges in administering justice in conflict zones, as well as its contribution to peace efforts in Israel and Palestine.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.674
Threshold uncertainty score0.685

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.316 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it