Way to Measure the Concept Precarious Working Conditions in Oil Palm Plantations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oil palm plantations are the backbone of the Malaysian economy, since day immemorial. When you look intothe past, the workers in the oil palm plantations were dominated by Indian and Chinese communities. Later dueto the sigma associate with oil palm plantations jobs viz., dirty, dangerous and distance, the Indians and Chineseworkers moved away from the oil palm work and they were replaced by Indonesians and Philippines. Theseforeign workers whom having the legal and illegal status under enforcement in Malaysia, have been living inremotely located inhabitations engaging in ‘dirty, dangerous and distance’ wise oil palm plantations. Though thelarger oil palm plantation companies ensure minimum living and working conditions for the foreign workers,vastly located small holding plantations never follow such minimum and fair working environment. Theseconditions to be correlated with the term “precarious working conditions’ in small holding oil palm plantations.Due to lack of availability of the locals to engage in oil palm work, the plantations have to depend on foreignworkers do all these ‘dirty, dangerous and distance’ workers in oil palm plantations. Except a few literatureavailable from Amnesty international and local NGOs, there is less evidence to prove the existence of suchexploitative working conditions in oil palm plantations. In order to explore precarious working conditions in oilpalm plantations thus a qualitative research study is conducted in the Sabah region of the Eastern Part ofMalaysia. The study followed, triangulation method through interviews with the migrated foreign workers, (legaland illegal), focus group discussions and Delphi technique with the identification of experts in the field to arriveat the factors and categories related to the theme ‘precarious working conditions’ in oil palm plantations. Theoutcome of the study fixes the variables that need to be concentrated for a higher level research throughquantitative research.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".