Bibliographic record
Abstract
Preface. Contributors. Introduction A.F. Bayefsky. I: An Analysis and Evaluation of the System of State Reporting. 1. An Analysis and Evaluation of the System of State Reporting J. Connors. 2. State Reporting and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women C. Shalev. 3. State Reporting and the Committee on the Rights of the Child J. Karp. 4. State Reporting and the Role of Non-Governmental Organizations L. Theytaz-Bergman. 5. State Reporting: an NGO Perspective R. Brett. II: Fact-finding as Part of Effective Implementation. 6. Human Rights Fact-Finding J. Fitzpatrick. 7. The Role of a Human Rights Field Presence I. Martin. 8. Fact-Finding in the Inter-American System D.W. Cassel, jr. 9. Fact-finding as Part of Effective Implementation: the Strasbourg Experience A. Drzemczewski. III: An Effective Individual Complaint Mechanism in an International Human Rights Context. 10. An Effective Complaints Procedure in the Context of International Human Rights Law A. Byrnes. 11. Commentary on Complaint Processes by Human Rights and Torture Committee Members (a) The Human Rights Committee D. Kretzmer (b) The Committee Against Torture P. Burns. 12. Reflections on the Effectiveness of the European System for the Protection of Human Rights M. O'Boyle. IV: Defining the Role of Non-governmental Organizations. 13. Defining the Role of Non-Governmental Organizations with Regard to the UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies A. Clapham. 14. Women's Human Rights NGOs and the Treaty Bodies: Some Case Studies in Using the Treaty Bodies to Protect the Human Rights of Women A.M. Miller. 15. The NGO Role: Implementation, Expanding Protection and Monitoring the Monitors S. Grant. 16. Defining the Role of Non-Governmental Organizations: Splendid Isolation or Better Use of NGO Expertise? M. Thomson. 17. The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and Non-Governmental Organizations V. Dandan. V: Follow-up of Treaty Body Conclusions by the Treaty Bodies and the United Nations Mechanisms Beyond. 18. Follow-Up Mechanisms Before UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies and the UN Mechanisms Beyond M.G. Schmidt. 19. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights: A Link Between Decisions of Expert Monitoring Bodies and Enforcement by Political Bodies M. Nowak. 20. The Effects of Final Decisions of the Supervisory Organs Under the European Convention on Human Rights L.F. Zwaak. 21. Follow-Up in the ILO Context J. Hodges. 22. Follow-Up of Treaty Body Conclusions by the Treaty Bodies and the UN Mechanisms Beyond B.G. Ramcharan. VI: The Future of the Human Rights Treaty System: Forging Recommendations. 23. The Future of the Human Rights Treaty System: Forging Recommendations E. Evatt. 24. A Court and Two Consolidated Treaty Bodies T. Buergenthal. VII: The Role of National Courts: A Canadian Example. 25. Enforcing International Human Rights Law: The Treaty System in the 21st Century Rt. Hon. A. Lamer. VIII: Conference Outcomes: Discussion and Recommendations. 26. Discussion A. Bayefsky. 27. Conclusions and Recommendations A. Bayefsky. Appendices. Index.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.039 | 0.017 |
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".