MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2966498867 · doi:10.1093/jhuman/huz023

The Practitioner’s Bookshelf: Tenth Anniversary Recommendations

2019· article· en· W2966498867 on OpenAlex
James Loeffler, Noah Weisbord, Brian N. Phillips

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Human Rights Practice · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Rights and Development
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman rightsQueen (butterfly)Section (typography)Political scienceLibrary scienceLawBiologyZoologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract With this tenth anniversary issue of the Journal of Human Rights Practice, we are launching ‘The Practitioner’s Bookshelf’—a new feature of the JHRP Review section containing brief reviews of recent publications of particular interest to human rights practitioners. In this instalment, James Loeffler (University of Virginia), Noah Weisbord (Queen’s University, Canada), and Brian Phillips (JHRP) discuss three books they consider to be among the most significant contributions to the literature of human rights practice to have appeared during the JHRP’s first decade.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.796
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.322 · 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