SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO: THE NEW LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE PROTECTION OF ETHNIC MINORITIES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the beginning of 2003, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was reconstituted as the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro. The reconstitution was legalized by the Constitutional Charter of Serbia and Montenegro of March 27th, 2003. The fate of this union is pretty uncertain as it remains to be seen whether it will survive and in which form, or whether the associated republics, Serbia on the one side, and Montenegro on the other, shall soon separate. However, life goes on. In the last few years, even months, certain changes of the legal system were introduced in Yugoslavia. Among these changes, particularly interesting were those related to the regulation of rights and the situation of ethnic minorities. The analysis of the legal regulations of a certain state logically starts with its supreme legal act, its constitution, and then continues to its other relevant statutes and regulations. Still, having in mind the current realities of Serbia and Montenegro, a form of chronological order seems more suitable. Therefore, after the introductory notes, the Federal Act on Protection of Rights and Freedoms of National Minorities (adopted in 2002 in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and still in effect) will be presented, with the relevant supreme legal acts of the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro after that.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".