The First Episode of the Air Law Journal: A Bleached Mirror of the Future
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores the first issues of the Air Law journal, which has been re-branded as Air & Space Law in the course of its existence. It is designed to find out how air law, as manifested by the articles in these issues, has evolved throughout the lifetime of this journal. It cannot deal with the many air and space law related subjects which have been reported. However, an attempt has been made to distil the most important developments which took place during the first ten years of Air & Space Law, which was then published as Air Law, and to reflect on the evolution of these disciplines. The term ‘a bleached mirror’ has been employed to indicate that certain subjects, such as the relationship between the operation of air transport services and the application of a competition law regime, have shed light on future aviation activities. A subject which received relatively much attention between 1975 and 1985 pertained to the liability of Air Traffic Controllers (ATC), which is currently re-appearing on legal agendas. Air carrier liability is a constant factor in publications, whether related to the Warsaw regime or the Montreal Convention of 1999. The distinction between scheduled and non-scheduled services was amply examined in the first period, but has now more or less disappeared behind the horizons of legal reflections.
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 | 0.001 | 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".