MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2753971949 · doi:10.60082/2563-4631.1065

Assessing Universalism and The Rhetoric of Development Assistance in Human Rights Research: Canadian-Ghanaian Human Rights Engagements

2017· article· en· W2753971949 on OpenAlex
Sylvia Bawa

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Transnational Human Rights Review · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Rights and Development
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman rightsUniversalismCultural relativismRhetoricTransformative learningPolitical scienceEnvironmental ethicsInternational human rights lawSociologyRight to propertyFundamental rightsCultural rightsRelativismLaw and economicsLawEpistemologyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article is a contribution to the question of how Canada engages human rights in Ghana and Anglophone sub-Saharan Africa in general. In order to critically assess human rights engagement between Ghana and Canada, I situate the discussion within the broader global human rights milieu to deconstruct the myriad ways in which power dynamics in the global arena shape human rights practice and discourse. Using the rights concerns of women and minorities in Ghana as an entry point, I discuss the interconnected nature of first- and second-generation rights and cultural relativism in universal rights discourses. This discussion aims to propose a research agenda that will approach human rights in a more progressively transformative fashion.

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 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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.786
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0270.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.157
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.264 · 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