MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404863287 · doi:10.1080/13642987.2024.2433669

Search the landfill: obligation of the Canadian Government to bring stolen sisters home

2024· article· en· W4404863287 on OpenAlexaffabout
Danendri Laleema Senanayake

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Human Rights · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObligationGovernment (linguistics)Human rightsPolitical scienceLawBusinessPublic administration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The most pressing human rights issue in Canada is identified as the situation of its Indigenous people. Specifically, missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls (MMIWG) is seen as one of the crucial issues in Canada. The Government of Canada (GC) has taken positive steps to address the issue of MMIWG, including the national inquiry into MMIWG. The latest victims of the issue of MMIWG in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, are Rebecca Contois, Morgan Harris, Marcedes Myran, and an unidentified woman named as Mashkode Bizhiki’ikwe. This paper explores the framework provided by the International Human Rights Law (IHRL) to address the deprivation of the human rights of MMIWG. The right to life and the right to be free from torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment is assessed using IHRL and the Genocide Convention. Finally, the paper adopts a Human Rights Based Approach (HRBA) to respect, protect, and fulfill the right to life and the right to be free from torture, cruel, inhuman, degrading treatment of MMIWG in Canada.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score0.695

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0420.012
Scholarly communication0.0100.002
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.292 · 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
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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of Human RightsSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207