Supporting Individual and Society as One of the Principles of Citizenship Rights in Islamic Republic of Iran
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Citizenship rights is an obvious issue and one must defend the rights of citizens; but at the same time, we must consider the social realities of a society. When one speaks of the rights of citizens in a society, it does not mean to abide it and this right must be respected especially by government officials. To achieve this objective, the emphasis on understanding, implementation, and observance of citizenship rights should become as a culture and the government should do its supportive measures and efforts fairly and accurately so that social anomalies that are rooted in the lack of abiding citizenship rights, do not spread in the society. Therefore, it should be said that citizens, society, and the government are the three vertices if citizenship rights triangle, as the existence of all vertices is necessary. In this article, we discuss the concepts of citizenship rights and evaluate and assess the supporting principles of the individual and society which are considered as the government’s duties. The reason for studying this issue is to find out why to support individual and society rights? Is this support a citizenship right? The aim of this study is to review citizenship rights including socio-political rights, economic rights and social welfare, judicial and cultural rights as well as supporting principles of the individual and society. To do this study, articles, and various books were studied and fundamentals of supporting the individual and society were developed and extracted. This review showed that supporting individual and community are including citizenship rights, and has been emphasized in all laws and international conventions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".