MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093017361 · doi:10.5131/ajcl.2013.0036

Social and Economic Rights as Fundamental Rights

2014· article· en· W2093017361 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Comparative Law · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Rights and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFundamental rightsPolitical scienceConstitutionSocial rightsConstitutional rightLawJurisprudenceSupreme courtState (computer science)Government (linguistics)Social securityDue Process ClauseInternational human rights lawConstitutional lawBill of rightsHuman rightsNational security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This report uses the definition of “social rights” in “The Toronto Initiative for Economic and Social Rights,” and focuses on two of these rights which have been litigated in the United States: the right to social security, at the Federal level, and the right to education, at the state level. We note that the U.S. Constitution does not expressly recognize any of the social rights listed in the introduction to this national report, and that American courts and legal scholars are generally skeptical about protecting social rights through constitutional law. The limited exceptions to this skepticism appear in the prohibition on discrimination against the indigent with respect to the exercise of “fundamental rights” like the right to travel and the guarantee of procedural rights before welfare rights may be terminated. All fifty state constitutions recognize the right to education to varying degrees, although only some deem it a fundamental right. While some state courts consider challenges to educational schemes to be non-justiciable, and defer to the legislature, others have heard such cases, most of which are based on equal protection or educational quality rationales. We conclude, however, that the United States is likely not in total compliance with the education component of the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.538
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.316 · 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