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
…] two aspects of the right to nationality: the right to a nationality from the perspective of endowing the individual with the basic legal protection for a series of relationships by establishing his connection to a specific State, and the protection of the individual against the arbitrary deprivation of his nationality […]1 IACtHR, Case of Expelled Dominicans and Haitians, 2014 ∵The previous chapter concluded that the right to nationality is codified in most international and regional human rights instruments and enjoys broad and growing international support.The central question to determine the status of the right to nationality as a legal human right, according to UN ga Resolution 41/ 120, is now whether the right is sufficiently precise to give rise to identifiable and predictable rights and obligations.So what does the right to nationality actually entail?What is its scope and content?To whom does it apply?When and where?Which specific rights and obligations can be derived from the right to nationality?And what are the conditions under which the right may be lawfully interfered with?The aim of this chapter is to define the scope and content of the right to nationality under current international law to specify the rights of individuals and the obligations of states under the right to nationality.Article 15 udhr -"the general rule on the right to a nationality that applies in all circumstances"2 -can again be taken as a starting point.This will set the stage to discuss the gaps of the current framework and propose an alternative interpretation of the right to nationality in Chapter 6.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.217 | 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