Animal Rights in Indonesian Environmental Law: Case Studies in Disaster Prone Areas
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research focuses more on analysing the urgency of animal rights protection in Indonesia: case studies in disaster-prone areas and examining the legal status of animals as legal subjects to recognise animal rights in Indonesian Environmental Law. This research is research in the field of law with a normative juridical approach. The study results indicate that the authorised institution must carry out the preparedness phase to ensure animal welfare to deal with emergencies such as natural disaster situations. When animals have become legal subjects, then if actors want to destroy and criminalise habitats, animal life will automatically think twice about doing so. Animals have been recognised, and guaranteed legal certainty will be realised as a situation where previously animals became legal objects now become legal subjects. The House of Representatives and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia are expected to make changes to environmental laws and various policies related to animals in disaster-prone areas.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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 it