MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3090870096 · doi:10.7202/1068986ar

CHRONIQUE DE LA JURISPRUDENCE DU SYSTÈME INTERAMÉRICAIN DES DROITS DE L’HOMME (2007)

2020· article· fr· W3090870096 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bernard Duhaime, Ariel Dulitzky

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue québécoise de droit international · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Rights and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian Government
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesJurisprudenceLawPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La Commission et la Cour interaméricaines des droits de l’homme sont deux organes de l’Organisation des États américains (OÉA) chargés de veiller à la protection des droits humains dans les Amériques. Les deux instances sont habilitées à instruire des recours individuels intentés contre des États Membres et portant sur des allégations de violations des droits de la personne. La présente chronique porte sur la jurisprudence de ces deux instances pour l’année 2007.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.448
Threshold uncertainty score0.891

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.005
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue québécoise de droit internationalSame topicHuman Rights and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207