MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297042562 · doi:10.18280/ijdne.170406

An Ethical Perspective of Animal Rights Protection in Indonesia

2022· article· en· W4297042562 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sekar Anggun Gading Pinilih, Hymne Gloria P. Sitepu, Retno Saraswati, Lita Tyesta ALW

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndonesian Legal and Regulatory Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversitas Diponegoro
KeywordsConstitutionalityEnvironmental ethicsEndangered speciesCreaturesHuman rightsAnimal ethicsPolitical scienceConstitutionLaw and economicsLawSociologyEcologyGeographyNatural (archaeology)Biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An environment is a meeting place for every living creature. They have an important role in respecting each other's rights in the environment. One of the living creatures in the environment is fauna. As part of the environment, fauna also has rights that must be fulfilled in the environment to avoid fauna becoming rare and even extinct. However, nowadays, many types of fauna are becoming rare and even on the verge of extinction. Of course, this is also caused by the pace of human development with all its interests in the environment. Often, human interest underestimates the existence of rare and even endangered fauna. To overcome this, humans must have an awareness of the rights of fauna. One of the steps that can be taken is to incorporate moral awareness into the legal domain. Therefore, to build moral awareness in the conservation of endangered species, it is hoped that there will be regulations that can accommodate all of them. Simply, to build moral awareness of animal rights, a law that specifically guarantees animal rights is needed, if necessary, to guarantee its constitutionality in the state constitution.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.493
Threshold uncertainty score0.465

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and EcodynamicsSame topicIndonesian Legal and Regulatory StudiesFrench-language works237,207