Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acknowledgements List of Contributors Interpreting Women's Right of Divorce Theoretical Reflections Chapter 1. Interpreting Divorce Laws in Pakistan - by Muhammad Khalid Masud Chapter 2. The Politics of Divorce Laws in Iran - by Ziba Mir-Hosseini Chapter 3. Egyptian Khul: Legal Reform, Courtroom Practices and Realities of Women - by Mulki Al-Sharmani Chapter 4. Justice for Everyone? Implementation of Morroco's 2004 Mudawana Reforms - by Rachel Newcomb Chapter 5. Divorce at the Woman's Initiative in India, in Pakistan and in the Diasporas - by Livia Holden Chapter 6. The Right to Divorce for Women (Khul) in Islam: Comparative Practices in Mauritania and Egypt - by Corinne Fortier Chapter 7. Muslim Divorces in Denmark - Findings from an Empirical Investigation - by Anika Liversage Chapter 8. In the Shadow of the Law - by Ralph D. Grillo Chapter 9. No-Fault Talaq: Divorce in Canadian Immigration and Family Law - by Pascale Fournier, Aida Setrakian og Pascal McDougall Chapter 10. Muslim Women, Divorce and Shari'ah Councils in Britain - by Samia Bano Chapter 11. Muslim Divorce Law Reform in Secular India - by Tahir Mahmood Chapter 12. Divorce - how Danish Law became liberal, and what to do now? - by Annette Kronborg & Idamarie Leth Svendsen
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".