MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2281091126

Legal Workplace Technology and Equality for Women Lawyers: Fortifying or Transforming the Master's House

2006· article· en· W2281091126 on OpenAlexaff
Jane Bailey

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBusiness Law and Ethics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelecommutingLaw and economicsPublic relationsLawBusinessSociologyPolitical scienceEngineeringElectrical engineeringElectronics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over recent decades there have been numerous predictions of the imminent arrival of the paperless office or of telecommuting by modems, faxes and telephones. Whilst all of these phenomena have progressed to some extent — more limited than many predictions — the idea of what is normal has not changed. However, it may.... Women have an interest in changing the paradigm of normal conduct of workplace relations in a direction which creates an alternative paradigm that does not require physical propinquity. All of the technologies that I have mentioned will assist in this regard.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.029
Scholarly communication0.0130.016
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0060.003
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic Journal→Same topicBusiness Law and Ethics→French-language works237,207→