MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W639780213

Gaps, Issues, and Prospects: International Law and the Protection of Underwater Cultural Heritage

2005· article· en· W639780213 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lowell Bautista

Bibliographic record

VenueDalhousie journal of legal studies · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMaritime and Coastal Archaeology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConventionCultural heritageExpansiveUnited Nations Convention on the Law of the SeaLawIndustrial heritageUnderwaterCultural heritage managementPolitical scienceExclusive economic zoneEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningHistoryGeographyArchaeologyEnvironmental science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The protection and preservation of underwater cultural heritage is becoming an increasingly important issue as technologies develop which allow for its exploitation. The UNESCO Convention on the Protection of Underwater Cultural Heritage ("UCH Convention") is an important step in the international regulation of this resource. This paper examines the theoretical and historical antecedents of the UCH Convention, and outlines the Convention's most significant provisions. Specifically, this paper examines how the UCH Convention protects underwater cultural heritage in six areas: internal waters, the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, the exclusive economic zone, the continental shelf, and the Area. This paper then examines the various concerns which arise from an analysis of the Convention, including the Convention's expansive definition of underwater cultural heritage and associated issues.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0090.031
Scholarly communication0.0200.019
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0100.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDalhousie journal of legal studiesSame topicMaritime and Coastal ArchaeologyFrench-language works237,207