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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This book moves beyond the artificial boundary between socio-economic and civil and political rights and instead focuses on the positive duties to which all rights give rise. Human rights have traditionally been understood as protecting individual freedom against intrusion by the State. This book argues that human rights are based on a far richer view of freedom, going beyond absence of coercion and focussing on the ability to exercise such freedom. This requires positive action to facilitate freedom, and substantive equality. It also recognizes the essentially social nature of human beings, and the crucial role of social interaction in advancing freedom. Drawing on political theory and social policy, as well as comparative experience from India, South Africa, the European Convention on Human Rights, the EU, US, Canada, and the UK, the book aims to create a theoretical and applied framework for understanding positive human rights duties. The first part focuses on creating an analytic framework for understanding positive duties. Chapter 1 aims to refashion the underlying values of liberty, equality and solidarity to yield the rich understanding of human rights argued for in this book. Chapter 2 focuses on the State, examining the role of positive human rights duties in furthering democracy, and in respect of globalization and privatization. Part II aims to fashion a democratic role for courts as well as examining alternative compliance methods, while Part III applies the analysis to specific rights, firstly equality, and then the traditional socio-economic rights to housing, education, and welfare.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it