International Women's Human Rights and the Hope for Feminist Law: Intersectionality as Legal Framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’auteure explore le developpement de l’intersectionalite- cette approche feministe aux differents champs d’enquetes- dans le contexte de la loi sur les droits humains internationaux. Tout d’abord ce texte remet en memoire le developpement et les limites de la CEDEF qui avait comme mandat de proteger les droits humains internationaux des femmes. Ensuite il retrace les multiples usages de l’intersectionalite a l’interieur de la sphere domestique en mettant l’accent sur les origines de la loi. On connait peu les debuts de ce nouveau concept surtout de son role de protecteur aupres des femmes quand il s’agit de la discrimination raciale. (CEDR). Des recherches recentes apportees par l’auteure ont note l’interet des Nations Unies pour l’ntersectionalite lors de la violation massive des droits humains et les violences sexuelles envers les femmes en Bosnie-Herzegovine et au Rwanda. Ce texte envisage la possibilite d’elargir les cadres des droits humains internationaux pour etablir une protection domestique et transnationale pour les femmes.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".