MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391863669 · doi:10.51644/9781554581009-001

Foreword

2007· book-chapter· en· W4391863669 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
R. Brian Howe, Katherine Covell

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChildren's Rights and Participation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On December 11, 1991, a group of children from every province and territory surrounded Prime Minister Brian Mulroney in the Rotunda of Parliament to sign along with him a document celebrating Canada's ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC).Poinsettias rose in tiers around the great central pillar and coloured lights twinkled among the gargoyles.Two local school choirs sang "O Canada!" in French and English and everyone clapped.As the chair of the Canadian Coalition for the Rights of the Child I spoke to the children about their rights and, on behalf of the people of Canada, Mr. Mulroney promised to respect them.So, fifteen years later, how have we done?How well have we fulfilled the promises we made that day?Our successes and failures are what this book is all about.We were full of hope on that snowy December afternoon, but, as with all the other major UN-sponsored human rights instruments Canada has ratified, the domestic implementation of the CRC has been neither as quick nor as comprehensive as we would have liked.In fact, in many ways, we have been more successful on the international scene than at home.As a country we have been seen as a leader in the field of children's rights; we have negotiated, signed, ratified, or adopted numerous international conventions, statutes, protocols, and declarations over the past decade that directly reference children.Child rights-based programming has been a priority for our official development assistance, and we remain strong supporters of the eight millennium goals to reduce poverty and improve lives by 2015, most of which involve children.Furthermore, we

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.743
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.7430.714

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicChildren's Rights and ParticipationFrench-language works237,207