Comparative human rights diplomacy in the shadow of the cultural relativism versus universalism debate: A case study of the UN Human Rights Council
Bibliographic record
Abstract
InternationalCommission against Impunity in Guatemala CJEU Court of Justice of the European Union CoE Council of Europe COHOM Working Party on Human Rights Cominform Information Bureau of the Communist and Workers' Parties COREPER Comité des représentants permanents (Committee of Permanent Representatives in the European Union) CRC Convention on the Rights of the Child CRPD Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities CSCE Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe CRMD Human Rights Council and Treaty Mechanisms Division CVM Cooperation and Verification Mechanism DEVE Committee on Development DPRK Democratic People's Republic of Korea DRC Democratic Republic of the Congo DRF democracy, the rule of law, and fundamental rights DROI Subcommittee on Human Rights (after the French Droits de l'Homme) EAS East Asia Summit EC European Community ECHR European Convention on Human Rights (formally the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms) ECJ European Court of Justice ECOSOC UN Economic and Social Council ECtHR European
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".