MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

¿Hay un derecho al turismo?

2019· article· es· W2918096548 on OpenAlex
Antonio Maniatis

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueCuestiones Constitucionales Revista Mexicana de Derecho Constitucional · 2019
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFinance, Taxation, and Governance
Canadian institutionsOptech (Canada)
FundersUniversidad Nacional Autónoma de México
KeywordsDerechoHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La libertad turística es una versión más amplia de la libertad clásica del movimiento. El derecho al turismo no es nuevo, dado que su existencia es tan antigua como la existencia del turismo. Según ese enfoque, el reconocimiento del turismo es nuevo. El derecho constitucional al turismo se reconoció por primera vez en la versión inicial de la Constitución italiana, que entró en vigor en 1948. Este derecho universal tiene que ver sobre todo con los derechos fundamentales de la segunda generación (particularmente con los derechos sociales, ejemplificados por los derechos al descanso y al ocio), dentro de la cual nació.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.569
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.013

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.218 · 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