MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

EL DERECHO A LA ALIMENTACIÓN ADECUADA EN CHILE Y SU NECESARIA CONSAGRACIÓN COMO DERECHO FUNDAMENTAL EN LA NUEVA CONSTITUCIÓN CHILENA

2021· article· es· W3217670636 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista chilena de derecho privado · 2021
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicComparative constitutional jurisprudence studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDerechoPhilosophyHumanitiesPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Amid the process of constitutional reform in Chile, this article addresses the historical, factual and international human rights arguments that justify the incorporation of the right to adequate food as an autonomous right in the new Constitution. Subsequently, the body of this text assesses the impact of this new constitutional right on Chilean private law, especially regarding the consumer protection regime and the right to be informed. The text argues that, ultimately, a constitutional right to adequate food will allow to extend the current norms on truthful and adequate information for consumers, contributing to a better guarantee of other human rights intrinsically related to food, such as the right to health.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.889
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.333 · 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