Global Reasonable Accommodation: How the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Changes the Way We Think About Equality
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
AbstractAbstract This article assesses the potential of the notion of reasonable accommodation as included in the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Reasonable accommodation provides a unique case of a domestic concept that has been gradually diffused transnationally, is in the process of being thoroughly internationalised and ought now to be re-domesticated so as to maximise its impact. The record of its domestic implementation so far however is not very promising, at least in countries that do not already have experience with the concept. The article traces some of the conceptual obstacles to implementation of reasonable accommodation including the enduring allure of formal equality, disputes about the meaning of 'reasonable' and the related notion of 'undue burden', the need to evaluate who the obligation applies to, and how it fits within the immediate/progressive realisation dilemma.Keywords:: international lawfundamental rightshuman rightshorizontalitydisabilitydiscriminationequality
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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