MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Introduction: On Being Sceptical about Human Rights

2001· book-chapter· en· W2501486594 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Adam Tomkins

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJudicial and Constitutional Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman rightsParliamentPolitical scienceSkepticismLawInternational human rights lawStatuteFundamental rightsLegislationPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Over the past two decades, human rights have come to enjoy an ever more dominant position in national constitutional or public law. This has been as true for Canada and New Zealand as it has been for Poland and Hungary. One of the last countries in the common law world, and one of the last countries in Europe, to allow its domestic legal system to embrace human rights is the United Kingdom, whose Parliament passed the Human Rights Act 1998. The Human Rights Act 1998, which came into effect in October 2000, was one of the most widely celebrated statutes to have been passed by the UK Parliament in many years. This book examines both the global phenomenon of human rights and the UK's participation in it, focusing on legislation in communist eastern Europe to South Africa via North America and Australasia. It deals with the general issue of the various reasons why we might be sceptical about schemes such as that adopted in the Human Rights Act to incorporate judicially enforced human rights norms into binding law.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.004

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations8
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicJudicial and Constitutional StudiesFrench-language works237,207