MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2960211251

The Ecuadorian multicultural state

2010· book· en· W2960211251 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Isabela Figueroa

Bibliographic record

VenueLAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing eBooks · 2010
Typebook
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Arbitration and Investment Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousExpropriationConstitutionState (computer science)Political scienceConstitutionalismMulticulturalismProperty rightsLawSociologyGeographyEnvironmental ethicsPoliticsDemocracy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis argues that multiculturalism is a principle for interpreting the 1998 Ecuadorian Constitution and, in light of that, the inalienability of indigenous lands reflects the exercise of an inter-generational right and protects the exercise of indigenous self- governance. The Constitution also establishes the state's ownership of oil and any non- renewable resources in the subsoil. Most of Ecuador's oil reserves are located in the Amazon region, which is inhabited by several indigenous peoples. The intersection of the property systems for the surface and the mineral estate is a realm of constant conflict between indigenous peoples and the Ecuadorian state. The thesis argues that the 1998 Constitution prevents the multicultural state from extinguishing indigenous property rights even by resorting to expropriation based on a claim of public interest. Thus the thesis argues that indigenous consent is a condition precedent to state authorization of oil projects inside indigenous lands. This thesis was awarded the Chancellor's Graduate Medal, recognizing outstanding scholastic achievement among students at the Master's level from the University of Calgary in 2009.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.409
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.004
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.209 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing eBooksSame topicInternational Arbitration and Investment LawFrench-language works237,207