Advocacy for children in global conflicts: the value of children in our world
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Crises such as the Middle East conflict shine a light on the plight of children globally involved in places of conflict and poverty. Children are disproportionately affected in multiple ongoing global conflicts. 1 Shenoda et al. 2 state that 1 in 10 children globally are affected by armed conflict and more recently this number has escalated to 1 in 6. 3 One hundred million people are displaced globally, and this number is expected to double by 2050 due to climate change and decreased resources. 4 The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child provides protection for children and is an excellent source for advocacy to ensure every child has every right 5 ( https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-11&chapter=4&clang=_en ). The Convention maintains childhood as a special, protected time, in which “children must be allowed to grow, learn, play, develop and flourish with dignity” and is the most widely ratified human rights treaty in history. Unfortunately, the Convention is not completely implemented and not widely known, and millions of children do not have access to adequate nutrition, safety, health care and education.
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 | 0.017 | 0.051 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.041 | 0.045 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.006 |
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".