Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le Conseil des droits de l’homme se doit de contribuer à la promotion et au développement progressif du droit international des droits de la personne, en assurant « l’universalité, l’objectivité et la non-sélectivité de l’examen des questions relatives aux droits de l’homme et de mettre fin à la pratique du deux poids deux mesures et à toute politisation 1 ». Le Conseil procédera donc, à l’aide du nouveau mécanisme de l’examen périodique universel (epu), au contrôle du respect par les États de leurs obligations légales ainsi que de leurs engagements pris en matière de droits de l’homme. L’intérêt de mener une étude sur les aspects institutionnels du Conseil est nécessaire afin de mesurer sa capacité réelle à assumer son mandat étendu de promotion et protection des droits de l’homme et de déterminer l’attitude des États à l’égard des mécanismes institutionnels de protection de ces droits.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.001 |
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".