MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W565712337

International environmental law in international tribunals

2007· book· en· W565712337 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Karen Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2007
Typebook
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicInternational Maritime Law Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdvisory opinionJurisdictionPrinciple of legalityPolitical scienceLawInternational courtTribunalUnited Nations Convention on the Law of the SeaConventionInternational lawGeographyPublic international law
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Part I. International Court of Justice: 1. Fisheries Jurisdiction Case (United Kingdom v. Iceland) 2. Fisheries Jurisdiction Case (Federal Republic of Germany v. Iceland) 3. Nuclear Tests Case (New Zealand v. France) 4. Case concerning Certain Phosphate Lands in Nauru (Nauru v. Australia) 5. Request for an Examination of the Situation in accordance with Paragraph 63 of the Court's Judgment of 20 December 1974 in the Nuclear Tests (New Zealand v. France) Case 6. Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflict (Request by the World Health Organization for an Advisory Opinion) 7. Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (Request by the United Nations General Assembly for an Advisory Opinion) 8. Case concerning the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary v. Slovakia) 9. Fisheries Jurisdiction Case (Spain v. Canada) Part II. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: 10. Southern Bluefin Tuna Cases (New Zealand v. Japan) (Australia v. Japan) (Requests for Provisional Measures) 11. The MOX Plant Case (Ireland v. United Kingdom) (Request for Provisional Measures) 12. The 'Volga' Case (Russian Federation v. Australia) (Application for Prompt Release) 13. Case concerning Land Reclamation by Singapore in and around the Straits of Johor (Malaysia v. Singapore) (Request for Provisional Measures) Part III. Arbitral Tribunals: 14. Southern Bluefin Tuna Case (Australia and New Zealand v. Japan) 15. The MOX Plant Case (Ireland v. United Kingdom) 16. Dispute Concerning Access to Information under Article 9 of the OSPAR Convention (Ireland v. United Kingdom) Part IV. United Nations Compensation Commission: 17. Report and Recommendations made by the Panel of Commissioners appointed to review the Well Blowout Control Claim 18. Report and Recommendations made by the Panel of Commissioners Concerning the First Installment of 'F4' Claims.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.792
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicInternational Maritime Law IssuesFrench-language works237,207