MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2516263139 · doi:10.1057/978-1-137-48854-1_4

The Radiating Effect of the Asylum Court on Religion

2016· book-chapter· en· W2516263139 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Nijhawan

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave Macmillan US eBooks · 2016
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Refugees, and Integration
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPersecutionAdjudicationLawPolitical scienceField (mathematics)CredibilityContext (archaeology)Freedom of religionPoliticsSociologyHistoryHuman rights

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter examines the relationship between the legal field and religion, looking in particular at the discourses of judges in the administrative court. Nijhawan arrives at a new understanding of the cultural transactions and interpretations that inform adjudication in the field of asylum law since the 1980s in Germany. The chapter traces the production of credibility and shows how judges and courts (including the EuHC) develop theories of religious persecution that intersect with Ahmadiyya theological discourses. A key contribution lies in the discussion of the relationship between the forum internum and forum externum in the context of asylum law, which is of interest for the study of the politics of religious freedom.

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 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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score0.832

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 venuePalgrave Macmillan US eBooksSame topicMigration, Refugees, and IntegrationFrench-language works237,207