MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7096685554

Turban and the French Law A question of Freedom of Conscience

2015· article· en· W7096685554 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSouth Asian Studies and Diaspora
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSecularismAllegianceConscienceParliamentPoliticsHuman rightsState (computer science)Liberalism
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

THE TURBAN OF THE SIKHS, A HOARY article of their faith, is once again caught in the controversy of definition of secularism as understood within the framework of French republicanism and political liberalism of the other countries of the world. The legal debate on this issue coursing through U.K., Canada, America, has finally reached the Courts of France, and European Human Rights Commission. It may also reach International Court of Justice. The Sikhs have proved everywhere else that they have fundamental and inalienable right to wear their turban in all situations of life. Without proper consideration, the Parliament of France has passed the Law prohibiting all signs of outward manifestation of any religious faith. The reason given for passing such a Law is that any human being owing allegiance to particular groups, with collective or religious interest, cannot be a good citizen, since a good citizen does not belong to anyone. The definition of secularism, or state neutrality, as has been developed in France is totally opposed to the definition of secularism as understood in the Common Law countries. The purpose of such a law is to

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)0.006
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score0.402

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.035
Scholarly communication0.0110.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSouth Asian Studies and DiasporaFrench-language works237,207