MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003738939

The Doctrine of Discovery, LatinXo Theoethics, and Human Rights

2019· article· en· W3003738939 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Néstor Medina

Bibliographic record

VenueUSF Scholarship Repository (University of San Francisco) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDoctrineHuman rightsPolitical scienceLawLaw and economicsPhilosophyEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction 1992 marked the quincentenary of the violent clash between Spanish Europeans and Indigenous and originary peoples of what we know today as the Americas.In 2015 the Indian Residential Schools Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) published the report of the long-standing history of human rights abuses in the Canadian residential school system.The Canadian report is the most recent documented record of the long history of violations of human rights in the Americas following a long list of reports from similar commissions in Latin America including Argentina (1983), Bolivia (1982), Chile (1990), El Salvador (1992), Guatemala (1994), Honduras (2009), Panama (2000), and Uruguay ( 1985, 2003).In highlighting and documenting human rights abuses, each of these national commissions outlines how life itself lost its value.The moral imperative of the sacredness of life and the notion of inalienable human rights had no meaning, particularly when it came to the protection of life and the preservation of cultures among Indigenous peoples, African descendants, and el campesinado in the Americas.In this paper, I have taken the time to explore how the Doctrine of Discovery and the understanding of terra nullius have developed over time because I believe they continue to shape and inform international and geopolitical affairs as well as internal-domestic sociopolitical dynamics.These two ideas influence notions of national borders and sovereignty and the understanding of human rights, ethnoracial and intercultural relations, and the participation of 1

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.038
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUSF Scholarship Repository (University of San Francisco)Same topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207