MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088391397 · doi:10.2298/tem1202181k

Limits to tolerance: Tribal social order versus human rights

2012· article· en· W2088391397 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ferdinand Kirchhoff, Nazia Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueTemida · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Contemporary Political Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdeologyHuman rightsOrder (exchange)MillerSociologySocial orderLawEnvironmental ethicsPolitical sciencePhilosophyPoliticsEcologyEconomicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a globalized world, there are clear differences in ideologies that are usually not spelled out. The paper follows the approach prescribed by Ben David?s ?Victim?s Victimology? (2000) and applies a classical approach to ideologies in social sciences by W.B. Miller (1973). The main subject of this paper is the difference between local order ideology and human rights ideology. The aim is to show that formal social control is determined or influenced by these different ideologies. The authors analyze four cases of victimization of women in different social settings , in Sudan (2012), Canada (2012), India (1985) and in Pakistan (2002). In all these cases the local order ideology clashes with a human rights ideology. Limits to tolerance must be clear.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.966
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.073
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.209 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTemidaSame topicHistorical and Contemporary Political DynamicsFrench-language works237,207