Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dear Readers,\nThis issue is a celebration of Sustainable Development Law & Policy Brief’s (SDLP’s) twentieth anniversary. It has been a privilege to oversee SDLP during this tumultuous time. Now more than ever, we need to focus on global ramifications of the human environment. Over the past twenty years, SDLP has discussed developing theories in international environmental law. While we are living in strange times, SDLP continues to be a place to discuss how humans interact with the environment.\nFor this issue, we are celebrating twenty years by publishing articles and features that look at where the law of sustainable development is and where it is going. Professor David Hunter, who has been with SDLP since its inception, writes a look[ back at the past twenty years of developments in international environmental law By reviewing how the law has changed over the course of two decades, we can predict where the law needs to go to meet the challenges of decades to come.\nOur other articles provide insights into how modern environmental challenges will stretch North American federalism. The view from Canada shows how Arctic governance is changing with the melting of the northern polar ice cap and how indigenous populations are playing a key role in the new Arctic policies. The view from the United States explores the intersection between federalism, copyright law, and enforcement of the Clean Air Act. Both views illustrate how the federalist models of Canada and the United States are being confronted by new realities and technologies.\nWe would like to thank all the article and feature authors for their insights and thoughtful analysis of legal issues. We would also like to thank the professors, e-board, staff, and publisher of SDLP for making this publication possible. Finally, we would like to thank our readers, whose involvement and investment in SDLP is the reason that we have been able to create this publication for twenty years.\nCheers to twenty more great years!
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 | 0.004 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.019 | 0.020 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.088 | 0.056 |
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".