MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2780753235

Implementing ILO 169 in Latin America

2017· article· en· W2780753235 on OpenAlexaff
Stefan Kirchner

Bibliographic record

VenueLaCRIS (University of Lapland) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Rights and Development
Canadian institutionsInstitute on Governance
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRatificationLatin AmericansConventionPolitical scienceIndigenousTreatyIndigenous rightsLawHuman rightsPolitics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The possible ratification of ILO Convention No. 169 in Finland is almost as old as the convention itself. Adopted originally in 1989, the convention does not reflect the dramatic developments in customary international law in the field of indigenous rights in the last decades but remains the key international treaty concerning the rights of indigenous peoples. This chapter seeks to inform the debate by looking at the way the convention has been implemented in different Latin American countries, thereby aiming to draw lessons for Europe from Latin America and the local experiences there.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.680
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.248 · 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.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLaCRIS (University of Lapland)Same topicHuman Rights and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207