MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2983634685 · doi:10.4324/9780429324376-22

Freedom of religion and the new diversity

2019· book-chapter· en· W2983634685 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lori G. Beaman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiversity (politics)SociologyAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Freedom of religion is the primary human rights protection related to religious belief and practice. Its form and interpretation vary from context to context, and it has been used both to protect and to colonize. The principle is contained in many constitutional documents as well as in international treaties, conventions, and agreements. Drawing on the Supreme Court of Canada’s 2017 Ktunaxa Nation decision, this essay focuses on religious freedom as a human right and examines the need to reconceptualize religious freedom beyond a Christian imaginary of religion in order to extend human rights protections to minority religious persons and groups. The issues that arise in Canada are common to other countries and although there are context-specific dimensions, the protection of religious belief and practice as a human rights issue has a long-standing history and remains a matter of debate, with issues such as religious symbols in public spaces, forced conversion, and persecution for beliefs and practices retaining currency across time.

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)0.001
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.194

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.040
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.228 · 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
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics→French-language works237,207→