MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1838890635

Inicijative za promicanje pristupačnosti elektroničkih informacija osobama s invaliditetom

2009· article· hr· W1838890635 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueE-LIS Repository (University of Naples Federico II) · 2009
Typearticle
Languagehr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Accessibility for Disabilities
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSituational ethicsThe InternetVariety (cybernetics)Internet privacyPublic relationsBusinessPolitical scienceComputer scienceLawWorld Wide Web
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an overview of the developments that led to the establishment of standards for management and\ndefinition of technological, economic and social aspects of accessibility of Internet sites and electronic documents for persons with disabilities. The persons with disabilities are being discriminated due to a lack of accessibility of electronic information.\nAccessibility of electronic resources is not limited to disability related issues only but it also takes into account situational, social and cultural aspects . Indeed, those aspects do not exclude functionality as an important criterion. They include cultural, social,gender and situational aspects as the use of Internet should not be based solely on a person’s disability. Other aspects of personality should not be neglected either. The development of free software has enabled easier implementation and the development of web applications developed according to the accessibility guidelines. Free software ATutor is presented in this paper as a successful and viable application for accessible learning content management. Free licensing enables everybody to use this software freely.\nLegal regulations enacted in EU, USA, Canada, Australia and other states give an example of how this issue can be legally regulated in a successful way. A variety of civic, governmental, inter-governmental associations and institutions strive on local and international levels to promote and implement standards and legal regulations in the field.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.187
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.005
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.227 · 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