MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2508789145 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v9n7p128

Child's Privacy Jurisprudence and International Instruments

2016· article· en· W2508789145 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zahra Jaberi Ansari, Mohammad Bahrami Khoshkar, Mohammad Ebadi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJurisprudenceFiqhLawPolitical scienceHuman rightsRight to privacyPrivacy lawIslamPrivacy policyInformation privacySociologyShariaGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the privacy rights of Shiite jurisprudence Iran directly noted instances of its use of the term is limited including the need to protect the privacy of the place with the explicit text of the Holy Quran. It's important to enter the house without letting others do not the civil rights of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which is Shiite jurisprudence emanating from pointed to some evidences of privacy. But in international documents under human rights law and conventions of privacy have been more effectively different categories of persons referred to in the privacy in Shiite jurisprudence and civil rights and the fundamental rights of the Islamic Republic of Iran. However, also examples of human beings considered independently about the child's privacy is something not stated. Although, due to the arrival of children, especially in social virtual communities appear to need immediate attention to children's privacy by lawyers. The drafters of civil law is necessary and international measures to develop laws in this case was conducted including raising the age to 16 years joined children to social networks can be mentioned which is also protect the privacy of physical and sexual children abuse. All psychologists’ attention and extreme caution is ding to conflicts. According to the children defenseless against this social problem that should be subject to specific and severe punishment for properties compared with adults who are physically punished are more defense capabilities and reason legislators should be.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.043
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0080.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Politics and LawSame topicEthics and Legal Issues in Pediatric HealthcareFrench-language works237,207