MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2318944398 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v9n2p246

Limitation of Individuals’ Rights and Freedoms and Its Principles in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran

2016· article· en· W2318944398 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Homa Mahdavi Pour, Seyyed Mohammad Sadegh Ahmadi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitics and Conflicts in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Middle East
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstitutionDignityHuman rightsPoliticsLawFundamental rightsPolitical scienceSociologyLaw and economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Constitution as the highest legal and political document in any political community is the regulator of all matters and affairs and specifies moderate relations between authorities. Commitment to the implementation of this important law closes the doors and possibilities of dictatorship and guarantees human dignity and individuals’ sanctity and freedom and facilitates attempting to achieve political and social justice. Without any doubt the majority of rights and freedoms are not absolute; even there is no relation between fundamentality of rights and its absoluteness. In general view, we can specify that in the constitution of Islamic Republic of Iran, freedom has never become an absolute and non-disciplined issue; but the legislator has decreed some of its restrictions and conditions with respect to the objectives and ideals of humanity and by studying positive and negative achievements of other nations and thereby it has provided necessary internal cohesion and coordination among its components. This study investigates limitation of individuals’ rights and freedoms and its principles in the constitution of Iran.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.008
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.248 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Politics and LawSame topicPolitics and Conflicts in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Middle EastFrench-language works237,207