INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND THE INTER-AMERICAN SYSTEM OF HUMAN RIGHTS PROMOTION AND PROTECTION. STRATEGIC EXPLOITATION OF WINDOWS OF OPPORTUNITY
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Given the asymmetrical nature of international relations in the western hemisphere throughout the history of the OAS, we postulate that the dynamic of those relations explains major developments within the Inter-American human rights system, whereas the reverse is not the case. In other words, the system, its norms and constraints, have influenced little the direction of relations amongst states in the Americas. An historical overview reveals however that the system has consistently shown itself able to exploit “windows of opportunity” to push back the frontiers of its institutional limits, but this ability to impose more stringent human rights norms is never entirely unquestioned and remains highly contested by the member states. The article uses a periodisation of relations in the hemisphere on the one hand, and those within the inter-American system, on the other. It then analyses the periods that show strong correlation between international relations and innovations within the system in order to identify trends and perspectives for the future. It concludes with three possible scenarios for the immediate future of the system, based on emerging trends in international relations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it