MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1494160255 · doi:10.7202/011544ar

Workplace Equality: International Perspectives on Legislation, Policy and Practice edited by Carol Agocs, The Hagues, The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International, 2002, 290 pages, ISBN 90-411-1843-8.

2005· article· en· W1494160255 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Marie-Thérèse Chicha, Éric Charest

Bibliographic record

VenueRelations industrielles · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiscrimination and Equality Law
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationPolitical scienceLawLaw and economicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Workplace Equality: International Perspectives on Legislation, Policy and Practice edited by Carol Agocs, The Hagues, The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International, 2002, 290 pages, ISBN 90-411-1843-8.. Un article de la revue Relations industrielles / Industrial Relations (Volume 60, numéro 1, hiver 2005, p. 3-208) diffusée par la plateforme Érudit.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.117

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.008
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0090.011
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0350.011

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.303 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRelations industriellesSame topicDiscrimination and Equality LawFrench-language works237,207