MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389576056 · doi:10.1080/15570274.2023.2272428

Drafting on the Basis of Dignity: John Peters Humphrey’s Contribution to the UDHR

2023· article· en· W4389576056 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Paul Martens

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Review of Faith & International Affairs · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDignityDeclarationHuman rightsLawMoralityPolitical scienceSociologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite his idiosyncratic biographical journey, John Peters Humphrey became the first director of the Division of Human Rights at the United Nations and one of Canada’s most distinguished civil servants. Charged with preparing an initial draft of what would become the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), he had a pivotal role in rooting the human rights articulated in the UDHR in the concept of human dignity. Implicitly drawing on his understanding of a Christian morality freed from its “tommyrot,” his largely unrecognized organizing criteria for selecting and articulating the rights included in the initial draft appears to have been “the dignity of man.”

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.291

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Review of Faith & International AffairsSame topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207