MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W96984917 · doi:10.7202/1068704ar

L’ÉMERGENCE D’UN DROIT POUR LES PERSONNES DÉPLACÉES INTERNES

2020· article· fr· W96984917 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christel Cournil

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue québécoise de droit international · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClimate Change, Adaptation, Migration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Notre contribution porte sur le contexte d’émergence et le contenu des droits des personnes déplacées internes et sur leur protection. Il s’agira de mieux comprendre la place des États concernés dans la garantie des droits offerts aux PDIPP. Comment la communauté internationale s’est-elle emparée de cette question ? Qu’elles sont ses prospectives en terme de protection ? Les Principes directeurs remplissent-ils leurs objectifs après douze ans d’application ? Qu’elle est leur valeur, leur portée en droit international ? L’adoption, le 23 octobre 2009 à Kampala par l’Union africaine (UA) de la Convention sur la protection et l’assistance des personnes déplacées en Afrique relance le débat d’une protection contraignante des PDIPP. Jusqu’ici seul un cadre normatif de soft law ou des recommandations non-contraignantes servait de « guide » aux États confrontés aux déplacements internes. Il conviendra d’expliciter les points forts de ce nouveau texte régional et contraignant. Seront enfin abordés les défis – nombreux – qui restent à dépasser pour que la protection des PDIPP soit réellement opérationnelle, notamment à l’aune du nombre considérable de futures personnes déplacées internes en raison notamment des effets du changement climatique et des catastrophes naturelles.

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)0.006
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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.002

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue québécoise de droit internationalSame topicClimate Change, Adaptation, MigrationFrench-language works237,207