MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1175447545 · doi:10.1017/9780987171818

Freedom of Religion under Bills of Rights

2012· book· en· W1175447545 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Paul Babie, Paul Babie, Ngaire Naffine, Bruce Kaye, Alan H. Cadwallader, Neil J Foster, Robert C. Blitt, Patrick Parkinson, Asmi Wood, David M. Kirkham, Cornelia Koch, Nicky Jones, Ian Leigh, Frank S. Ravitch, Brett G. Scharffs, Barbara Billingsley, Charles J. Russo, Kris Hanna, Rex Tauati Ahdar, Paul Rishworth

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Adelaide Press eBooks · 2012
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBC Cancer AgencyAuckland District Health BoardTrinity Western UniversityUniversity of VirginiaNational Endowment for the ArtsU.S. Department of Justice
KeywordsViewpointsDemocracyPolitical scienceFreedom of religionPrincipal (computer security)Freedom of expressionContext (archaeology)Strengths and weaknessesFundamental rightsLaw and economicsLawHuman rightsSociologyEpistemologyPoliticsPhilosophyComputer scienceGeographyComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

How can a nation protect fundamental rights and freedoms, including religious freedom, within a liberal democratic context? The objective of the essays presentedin this volume is to provide an overview of the principal modelsused to protect fundamental freedoms, and especially the right to freedom of belief,expression and practice of one’s religion, in major liberal democratic systems. A range of viewpoints are presented in a comparative way in orderto obtain insights, reveal strengths, weaknesses and differences of opinion, and tolearn from the lessons of others, how religion might be and has been protected.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0000.003
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.213 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations9
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Adelaide Press eBooksSame topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207