Application of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; (Canada and Netherlands <i>v.</i> Syrian Arab Republic)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
339 International Court of Justice — Provisional measures — Alleged violations of Convention against Torture, 1984 — Prima facie basis for jurisdiction — Dispute concerning interpretation or application of Convention against Torture — Whether procedural preconditions under Convention against Torture met — Whether negotiations deadlocked — Whether applicants requesting arbitration — Whether Court’s jurisdiction subject to procedure before Committee instituted under Convention against Torture — Standing — Whether applicants having standing to file case against Syria — Erga omnes partes nature of obligations under Convention against Torture — Plausibility — Link — Irreparable prejudice and urgency — Whether evidence of violations alleged by applicants — Findings of United Nations reports and Commissions of Inquiry — Measures to be adopted — Power to indicate measures different in whole or in part from those requested — Measures for the preservation of evidence Human rights — Torture — Convention against Torture, 1984 — Definition of torture — Enforcement — Obligations erga omnes — Role of International Court of Justice
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.016 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.005 |
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".