The Role of International Organizations and Conventions in Legal Protection Efforts against Women Victims of ISIS Slavery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Generally, women have physical not as strong as men and always considered weak so often victimized by crime, aside from sexual slavery by ISIS. Sexual slavery by ISIS includes the category of crime against humanity and desecration of women’s dignity. Slavery is one of the most obvious signs to control and rule others. Therefore, legal protection is needed to alleviate the sadness and suffering women victims of sexual slavery by ISIS. This research aims to know the justification of ISIS thought to make women as sexual slaves and analyze the legal protection effort that can be given to women as victims of ISIS Sexual Slavery by the international organization and international convention. This research is normative legal research. The results of the research indicate the justification of ISIS thought to make women as sexual slaves is a woman who is made as sexual slavery is considered clean so that can enter the heaven. The legal protection effort that can be given to women victims of ISIS sexual slavery by international organization and international convention, one of them is proclaim the protection of human rights with annual review, closing all ISIS access to financial system, working with several countries, especially Canada and Germany in the emergency countermeasures relief programme for the victim, provide psychosocial support services shape training to overcome their problems, and establish social cooperation by encouraging the International Government to strengthen security in an area whose women are the most victims of ISIS sexual slavery.
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 | 0.014 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".