Distributive Justice and the Fundamental Human Rights (Focusing on Rights to Healthy Environment)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Justice is the ideal of human social life which can bestow the society order and stability and open up the way of sublimity. Resorting to the justice mechanisms, a peaceful collective community together with balance and equilibrium of different interests and conflicting wills become possible. Here the issue is the establishment of role of distributive justice in balance of general affairs of society along with acceptance of the notion of equal distribution of facilities, resources, rights and wealth among all people without any bias and prejudice and just because of intrinsic generosity of human kind in the first place, and establishment of the system of redistribution of resources for removing any practical injustice in society in the second place. Applying such theory has a direct relation with the preserving of the fundamental human rights through which the rights are distributed according to the being human and capabilities and virtues within a fair competition and in this way the threats to the fundamental human rights are decreased. The right of keeping a healthy environment can also be guaranteed under this theory.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.046 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".