Will the Rotterdam Rules be Accepted?\nA Liner Cargo Interest Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper begins with some background on modern liner shipping and cargo interest perspectives before considering the Rotterdam Rules 2008 (The Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea), which could ultimately replace Canada's existing carriage of goods legislation. The authors explore the key issues arising from the implementation of the Rules, and discuss why, from a manufactured goods perspective, there will likely be limited acceptance by cargo owners. They conclude that the gains made in the areas of electronic documentation and greater clarity on delay, as well as altered limits of liability do not offset the fact that most manufactured goods now move under confidential service contracts that may or may not choose to incorporate the Rotterdam Rules. On balance, it is unlikely that there will be widespread acceptance of the rules by those purchasing liner shipping services.
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 | 0.011 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.023 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.017 | 0.019 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.004 |
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".