MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1882065148

The Scars on Women's Minds and Bodies: Women's Roles in Post-Conflict Reconstruction in Uganda

2003· article· en· W1882065148 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ruth Ojiambo Ochieng

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian women's studies · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Peace and Security Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman rightsVanguardPolitical scienceGender studiesArmed conflictSociologyEconomic growthPsychologyLawHistory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since 1996 Isis-Women’s International Cross-Cultural Exchange (Isis- WICCE) has documented women’s experiences in situations of armed conflict in seven district of Uganda and in 16 countries globally. Isis-WICCE is an international women’s resource center established in 1974 with the aim of strengthening communicative mechanisms among women’s organizations worldwide in order to improve women’s status as well as make their views an integral part of the global agenda. One of Isis-WICCE’s objectives in documenting the experiences of women in situations of armed conflict was to determine the nature and extent of the crimes committed against women and girls and the consequences of these crimes to their well-being. It was also crucial to investigate how women and girls coped under these circumstances both during and after the war. For the past six years Isis-WICCE International Exchange Program has trained a vanguard of women activists from war-affected areas worldwide to document violations of women’s human rights in situations of armed conflict. The training has provided these women with the knowledge and skills necessary to use international regional and national instruments to advocate for the redness and respect of women’s human rights. The information collected by these activists is then packaged in various forms (print audio and visual) and shared with a wider audience. (excerpt)

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.685
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian women's studiesSame topicGlobal Peace and Security DynamicsFrench-language works237,207