MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7048084236

Jurisdiction Over Ice-Covered Areas and the Polar Code: An Emerging Symbiotic Relationship?

2016· article· en· W7048084236 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueeYLS (Yale Law School) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotocathodes and Microchannel Plates
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolar codeUnilateralismJurisdictionArcticLegislationPolarConvention
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recent adoption of the International Code for Ships Operating in Polar Waters (Polar Code),with effect from 1 January 2017 heralds a new era in polar shipping regulation. The implementation needs of the Polar Code are expected to challenge state parties to the international maritime law conventions concerned, most especially the coastal states of the Arctic Ocean, which have domestic regulatory regimes for shipping in their northern waters justified on the basis of Article 234 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.The author discusses the relationship between the Article 234 power, the Polar Code and existing national legislation governing polar shipping, and the compliance expectations for Arctic coastal states, in particular for Canada and the Russian Federation. The article concludes with observations on the balance struck between universality and uniformity in international maritime law on the one hand, and the unilateralism under Article 234 on the other.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.435
Threshold uncertainty score0.437

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.217 · 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