International and Transnational Criminal Law
Bibliographic record
Abstract
International criminal law has focused on the prosecution of truly international crimes — genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and aggression. The emerging field of transnational criminal law reflects the fact that our post-Cold War, post-9/11 world has seenbthe growth of transnational crimes of international concern, such as terrorism, money laundering, organized crime, and human and narcotics trafficking, as well as transnational crimes of domestic concern, which are simply ordinary domestic crimes that involve the jurisdiction of more than one state.\nThis book surveys these two related but increasingly distinct fields with a focus on Canada, bringing together in one accessible text topics that are of increasing importance in a world of globalized crime, from a substantive perspective and through examination of the expanding range of international tribunals dealing with such crimes. This third edition updates caselaw and international practice from Canada, including substantial revisions relating to the prosecution of cross-border crimes. It also combines examinations of international courts and tribunals, transnational criminal law treaties, and recent literature to provide a unique perspective on these two international law disciplines that, while best viewed as separate, retain a common heritage and some overlapping concepts and applications.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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".