MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205165907 · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-84647-3_42

Articles 42 and 44(6): Making the Convention and States Parties’ Compliance Widely Known

2022· book-chapter· en· W4205165907 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

VenueChildren's well-being · 2022
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Rights and Development
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConventionObligationPolitical scienceAccountabilityCompliance (psychology)LawDisseminationHuman rightsState (computer science)Public administrationPublic relationsPsychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract These two articles place obligations on States Parties regarding dissemination of information about the Convention. Article 42 demands that both adults and children must be informed about the rights in the Convention and its protocols. Rights holders must have knowledge of their rights and knowledge of how to exercise them if those rights are to be meaningful. Article 44(6) addresses the initial and periodic reports to the Committee on the Rights of the Child (the Committee) that States Parties are required to produce on progress in implementing the Convention and imposes an obligation on States Parties to disseminate the reports widely. The Committee insists that its Concluding Observations be broadly disseminated by States Parties, to inform the public of the responses given by governments and ensure accountability in this regard (2003, para. 73).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.750
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.242 · 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