MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6981933074

Galactic Gold Rush: Lawfulness, Lawlessness, and Preservation of the Outer Space Environment

2023· dissertation· en· W6981933074 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlcoholism and Thiamine Deficiency
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityAir Canada
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsOuter spaceSpace (punctuation)Outer planets
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Leading spacefaring powers plan to revisit the Moon, extract lunar resources, and someday springboard from the Moon to Mars and other celestial bodies.Against these ambitions, the core of space law was formulated in an era of two-State space competition with sometimes short-sighted notions of space exploration.This Thesis overlays the black-and-white space law paradigm of the Cold War with the technicolor reality of space aspirations in 2023 and beyond.It assumes that prevailing space laws permit lunar settlement and resource extraction to some extent.Yet, a vacuum of specific norms and regulations incentivizes a "galactic gold rush" that will foster destructive, unsustainable practices with irreversible effects.This Thesis examines whether the current space law framework adequately protects against lunar resource depletion, land conservation, and preservation of historic sites on the Moon.It argues that legal protections cannot keep pace with technological advances.The methodology weighs potential environmental harms against legal safeguards while valuing an interchangeable menu of environmental concerns.Furthermore, because space laws are inadequate to protect these concerns, this Thesis assesses alternative legal measures to guide future space exploration and resource extraction.The Galactic Gold Rush must be disincentivized at all costs.With years remaining before national space programs and private companies can fulfill promises of lunar and Martian settlement, there is still time to formulate helpful norms and best practices in outer space, avoiding hasty lawlessness, environmental harm, and wasteland-legacies of the California Gold Rush.v RsumLes principales puissances spatiales prvoient de retourner sur la Lune, d'extraire des ressources lunaires et d'un jour se servir de la Lune comme tremplin pour se rendre sur Mars et d'autres corps clestes.Face ces ambitions, le coeur du droit de l'Espace a t conu une poque de comptition spatiale entre deux tats avec des ides parfois sans vision long terme de l'exploration spatiale.Cette thse oppose le paradigme sans contraste du droit spatial issu de la guerre froide la ralit complexe des aspirations spatiales de 2023 et au-del.Elle suppose que le droit de l'Espace en vigueur permette dans une certaine mesure l'tablissement lunaire et l'extraction de ressources.Cependant, l'absence de normes et de rglementations spcifiques incite une rue vers l'or galactique qui favorisera des pratiques destructrices et insoutenables aux effets irrversibles.x

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.655
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicAlcoholism and Thiamine DeficiencyFrench-language works237,207