Bibliographic record
Abstract
This special issue emerges from conversations among the members of the International Journal of Refugee Law Editorial Board about ways to present an overview of key themes and issues in distinct areas of refugee law. The goal of having an open call for a special issue on gender was to invite scholars from around the world to come forward with research reflecting current concerns and projects, and thereby to develop a sense of the state of this important branch of refugee law practice and scholarship. A great deal has changed since the late 1980s and 1990s when scholars and advocates began devoting serious attention to how women did or did not fit into the refugee law paradigm.1 The early frontier of this battle was, of course, that the refugee definition focused on the public sphere and, shaped as it was by the backdrop of the Cold War, male political dissidents were the paradigmatic case informing interpretations of the pivotal concept of ‘being persecuted’. These two factors in combination led inexorably to a focus on men’s experiences that risked overlooking or minimizing the ways in which women experience persecution. An early flashpoint came from the obvious concern that, in comparison with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and indeed the United Nations Charter, neither women nor sex were mentioned in the Refugee Convention.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".