MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7024639982

The State as Polluter Challenge in Climate Law

2021· dissertation· W7024639982 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2021
Typedissertation
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicGraph Theory and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaMinistry of DefenseLantheus Medical ImagingUniversity of TorontoConocoPhillips
KeywordsState (computer science)Principal (computer security)Scope (computer science)Climate changeState responsibilityInternational lawEnvironmental lawPolluter pays principleGreenhouse gas
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is commonly assumed that private actors cause climate change. This assumption problematizes international environmental law and suggests that the conduct of private actors should be the principal focus of climate law. This thesis challenges the empirical predicate and legal implications of this common assumption. The assumption is empirically wrong because states-controlled polluters are responsible for much of the global greenhouse gas emissions. The assumption is also legally misleading because it obscures a state’s obligations under international climate change law. Acknowledging the state’s direct contributions to climate change and its attendant legal consequences justifies litigation against states and their entities, or ‘state as polluter’ litigation. The trajectory of state as polluter litigation, however, will be shaped by the law of state attribution and the law of state immunity. These jurisdictional hurdles limit the scope —but do not foreclose — the possibility of state as polluter litigation before international and foreign tribunals.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.021
Scholarly communication0.0090.014
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0050.008
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicGraph Theory and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207