Decolonizing collections: A legal perspective on the restitution of cultural artifacts
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
Despite an abundance of international instruments devoted to the restitution of illegally exported cultural artifacts, they usually exhaust their usefulness regarding artifacts looted during the Colonial Era. These requests are indeed confronted with various obstacles, whether it is the limited scope of the conventions, their non-retroactive nature, or the expiration of periods of limitation. In the absence of applicable international standards, plaintiffs must then refer to national laws and courts of justice in the States concerned in the dispute. However, due to the complexity of situations and the diversity of legal systems, legal proceedings are often unpredictable and unsatisfactory. In these circumstances, many restitutions today are the result of alternative processes (voluntary restitution, mediation, or arbitration) which allow the participants to invoke moral, ethical, or deontological principles and lead to equitable solutions adapted to each situation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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