The Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities : Its Contribution to the Development of International Human Rights Law
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the impact that the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) has had on international human rights law. While it seems that the convention may have a narrow focus, as it focuses on a specific group of people, this paper argues that it has had an impact on international human rights law more generally. This impact started with the negotiation of the convention between 2002 and 2006, and is continuing with its implementation since its entry into force in 2008. The impact is of both procedural and substantive nature. On the one hand, the procedure that led to the development and adoption of the CRPD was innovative, as are the mechanisms that have been put into place to monitor its implementation. On the other hand, the convention introduces and develops concepts in a novel way in international law, such as new ways of considering the concept of equality, and to understand development, for example. The article concludes that the international community should capitalize on the new approaches, and that their application and interpretation should be closely monitored.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".