Preventing Discrimination and Positive Protection for Minorities : Aspects of International Law
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Un pays est jugé par la façon dont il traite ses minorités, selon les paroles de Gandhi. L'auteur voit dans le respect de cette « règle de l'égalité » le symbole d'une maturité politique certaine. On n'a qu'à considérer l'histoire des guerres mondiales pour comprendre comment la façon dont on peut traiter certaines minorités peut affecter la paix des nations. L'élaboration du principe « d'autodétermination des peuples » après la guerre implique comme corollaire la protection des peuples minoritaires. Cette protection peut se faire sur deux plans, soit en cherchant à prévenir la discrimination, soit en élaborant des mesures positives de protection des minorités pour les aider à préserver leur identité. Sous quelles formes peut-on retrouver ces mesures de protection et quel en est l'impact réel, lorsqu'un pays entend davantage assimiler que protéger ses minorités. C'est à cette question que l'auteur tente de répondre.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.000 |
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.
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".