MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2981660329 · doi:10.1017/9781108380072.004

A Restorative Justice Approach to the “Armenian Problem”

2019· book-chapter· en· W2981660329 on OpenAlexaff
Turgut Tarhanlı

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2019
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Law and Human Rights
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArmenianRestorative justiceCriminologyPolitical sciencePsychologyHistoryAncient history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The periods in which political and social life lead to great grievances are candidates to be either forgotten or remembered. When it comes to forgetting or remembering the events and their victims, both endeavors are shaped by the search for a stable account. And yet, with reference to both individual and societal suffering, to seek ways of returning to the old and the closing of a dilemma of whether to remember or to forget is not always possible. Coping with this kind of pain in an individual sense and trying to survive it despite all that remains unresolved is probably a condition that falls more under the purview of the field of clinical psychology, which is beyond the scope of this chapter. Within the politics of justice, on the other hand, the aim is eliminating or reducing the effects of victimization; and this is the subject matter of the following pages.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.022
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooks→Same topicInternational Law and Human Rights→French-language works237,207→