MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2924938420 · doi:10.1017/s1742170519000103

The right to food, why US ratification matters

2019· article· en· W2924938420 on OpenAlexaff
Graham Riches

Bibliographic record

VenueRenewable Agriculture and Food Systems · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRatificationCovenantRight to foodFood securityPolitical scienceFood systemsHuman rightsGovernment (linguistics)Argument (complex analysis)Cultural rightsLaw and economicsPublic administrationBusinessLawPoliticsInternational human rights lawSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Molly Anderson's argument that irrespective of the US refusal to ratify the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR, 1966) it is time for federal food assistance programs such as SNAP mandated through the Farm Bill to adopt a right to food and nutrition approach is foresighted and significant. As is Anne Bellow's succinct and equally powerful proposal for widening the debate to include a system's-based human rights approach to a National Food Plan. Their timely advocacy is compelling given the few influential US food policy voices speaking from a food justice perspective about the dysfunctional industrial food system and the failure of the Federal Government to ensure access to healthy food and food security for all.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.180
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRenewable Agriculture and Food SystemsSame topicFood Security and Health in Diverse PopulationsFrench-language works237,207