Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1947, Harold Laski expressed concern that the proposed Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) might be little more than a new Kellogg-Briand pact—greeted with enthusiasm, and then ignored by its signatories. Instead, especially since the end of the Cold War, human rights have come increasingly to shape every aspect of political and social interaction. Indeed, the editor of this excellent volume goes so far as to describe them as ‘the doxa [uncontested given]’ of our time. This ‘strange triumph’ of human rights (as Mark Mazower described it in an influential article) has attracted considerable—albeit belated—interest from historians in recent years. The collection under review, the product of a conference held in Berlin in 2008, presents significant new research by some of the most prominent scholars in the field. While it does not purport to offer a complete history of human rights in the twentieth century, the book does provide a valuable insight into the ways in which historians are seeking to bring hard-edged critical analysis to bear on a subject that has, until recently, appeared to lack a history.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".