MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4243111113 · doi:10.1163/15730255-140300659

The Legislative and Institutional Framework for War-affected Land Rights in Iraq: Up to the Task Post-ISIS?

2020· article· en· W4243111113 on OpenAlexaff
Jon D. Unruh

Bibliographic record

VenueArab Law Quarterly · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTurkey's Politics and Society
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislatureProperty rightsContext (archaeology)PoliticsPolitical scienceLawGovernment (linguistics)Property (philosophy)Land tenureLand lawPublic administrationPolitical economyLaw and economicsSociologyGeographyAgriculture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Land and property rights in Iraq are an important component of recovery, particularly subsequent to the ISIS conflict. The return of 3.3 million internally displaced persons ( IDP s) due to the ISIS conflict are encountering claimants who were dislocated from previous wars and expropriations. This results in numerous land conflicts that if not dealt with will contribute to the country’s instability. Of primary importance in this regard is an ongoing discussion in government and the international community which focuses on a central question—are the current laws and institutions in Iraq, made for stable socio-political settings, able to manage the large-scale land and property problems emerging and ongoing in the country? This article considers this question by examining and critiquing the current legislative and institutional framework in Iraq in the context of the historical-to-present trajectories of land rights problems and development of land and property laws and institutions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.115

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.036
Scholarly communication0.0110.005
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.291
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArab Law QuarterlySame topicTurkey's Politics and SocietyFrench-language works237,207