International Cultural Property
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IntroductionThe illicit market in artworks, antiquities, and other cultural property continues to be a matter of international concern, and the year 2001 saw significant developments in the field of cultural property law.For example, pursuant to the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act' (CPIA), the U.S. government entered into significant bilateral agreements with Italy and Bolivia to require importers to prove legal export of archaeological artifacts and considered renewal of the bilateral agreements with Canada and Peru.It indicted an influential art dealer in New York who allegedly received ancient artworks that had been stolen and illegally removed from Egypt.Further, a civil action brought by the United States, pursuant to U.S. ratification of the 1970 UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property, 2 led to the return of a Wang Chuzhi Marble Wall Panel to the Cultural Relics Administration of the People's Republic of China.Also in 2001, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) adopted the UNESCO Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage, which provides a legal regime to protect the many millennia of history that resides in shipwrecks and underwater sites.Further, in its new Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity, UNESCO will require its member States to combat the illicit traffic in cultural property.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.351 | 0.166 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".