Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<JATS1:p>Should same-sex couples be permitted to marry? Or should a separate institution of ‘registered partnership’ or ‘civil union’ be created for them? Or should the rights and duties of unmarried different-sex couples be extended to them? Should they be allowed to adopt each other’s children, or jointly adopt an unrelated child? How should they be treated with regard to employment, social security, pensions, housing, immigration, taxation, inheritance, and divorce? These questions are being debated around the world, as lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered persons increasingly (but not uniformly) insist that they cannot be truly equal without equal treatment for the loving and lasting relationships they form with their partners. In ‘Legal Recognition of Same-Sex Partnerships’, an international team of scholars examines both theoretical issues and the wide variety of legal developments in the United States, Canada, Brazil, thirteen European countries, Israel, South Africa, India, Japan, China, Australia and New Zealand, as well as under European Community and European Convention law, and United Nations human rights law.</JATS1:p>
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it