MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2503997102 · doi:10.18415/ijmmu.v3i2.44

Surveying Ethnical Policies in Iran and Malaysia

2016· article· en· W2503997102 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAsian Studies and History
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPluralEthnic groupDeveloping countryPolitical scienceEconomic growthSociologyLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On the bases of culture and ethnic nowadays the world is a plural world, in way that it’s reasonable to say nowhere could be exempted fro this classification. Researches conducted in this field have classified all countries whether developed or developing into lingual, religion, racial and cultural classes.As result of religious, cultural and ethnical overlapping between the countries and cases of unsatisfied needs and request by such group, local, national and even disputes between theses group and their governments is a common case through the ages.this study was conducted while having a historical look on the issue of ethnics in two countries including Iran and Malaysia and also surveying current situation and place of this challenge in the two countries, and also determining courses of ethnical and tradition reconstruction.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.258
Threshold uncertainty score0.204

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.255 · 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