Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book explains how Argentines came to conceive of human rights after 1976—in antagonism to, in sympathy with, and with indifference toward the dictatorship that governed. It documents the emergence of human rights as a set of ideas stressing the military's building of a chilling justification for state terror. As ludicrous as the military's pro–human rights rationale became in the face of its horrifying record, the dictatorship narrative registered an important success overseas. By and large, Argentina was able to convince a majority of its international trade and diplomatic partners of its fanciful pro–human rights narrative. In most countries, the Argentine military staved off the international human rights related critique that entered the language of foreign policy makers in the United States, Canada, and Western Europe. As a result, the dictatorship suffered minimal damage economically and diplomatically from human rights-related fall-out. The positive foreign relations legacy of military rule leads to one further stage of analysis. In early 1984, there was no more important factor in the transition from dictatorship to democracy than human rights. Even so, through the 1980s, the new democracy faced some of the same domestic and international pressures confronted by the dictatorship over rights. Weakened by a shaky 1980s economy, the new government often confirmed and defended the military's international human rights record suggesting that the transition from dictatorship to democracy in Argentina was not the firm break with the past that Argentines had sought.
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 | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.240 | 0.127 |
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".