Bibliographic record
Abstract
My interest in state terrorism and human rights in Latin America goes back a couple of decades.I thank my dear friend Rody Oñate for sparking that interest.Rody, who was exiled fifteen years in Canada during the Pinochet dictatorship, introduced me to the phenomenon of mass political exile.This led to the book that we co-authored, Flight from Chile: Voices of Exile (1998).Forced exile is a clear violation of internationally recognized human rights as laid out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Articles 9 and 13.2.Yet many of those who went into exile had experienced more severe human rights violations, including arbitrary imprisonment and torture, and had family members or friends who were murdered or disappeared by the regime.This realization led me to delve further into state terrorism and its legacies; to place Chile in comparative perspective I decided to broaden the research to include the other most repressive regime in South America, the Argentine dictatorship of 1976-1983.The result was State Terrorism in Latin America: Chile, Argentina, and International Human Rights (2007).As usual, a finished research project generates questions for further study.Hence the present book, in which I explore how advocates of justice were able to break down the formidable walls of impunity that shielded human rights violators from justice under the democratic governments that succeeded the state terrorist regimes.In doing so, they accomplished a feat that has not been achieved in any other countries undergoing the transition from highly repressive governments to democracy: they opened the door to justice not for a few but for all former repressors who violated the human rights of those branded as Marxist or subversive, who were deemed enemies of the state.
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 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.442 | 0.284 |
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".