MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7126039126 · doi:10.1017/ilr.2025.13

Application of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; (Canada and Netherlands <i>v.</i> Syrian Arab Republic)

2025· article· en· W7126039126 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Law Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Law and Human Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTortureConventionUniversal jurisdictionJurisdictionHuman rightsEconomic JusticeArbitrationInternational law

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score0.801

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Law ReportsSame topicInternational Law and Human RightsFrench-language works237,207