MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2292223882

Constitutional Advancement of Women's E-Quality: Responding to Challenges and Seizing Opportunities

2005· article· en· W2292223882 on OpenAlexaff
Jane Bailey, Carissima Mathen

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicICT Impact and Policies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)ObligationThe InternetUniversal designCorporate governanceQuality (philosophy)Freedom of expressionPolitical scienceInternet governanceConstitutional rightPublic relationsSpace (punctuation)BusinessInternet privacyHuman rightsLawEngineeringComputer scienceConstitution
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Internet offers women unprecedented opportunity for connectivity, information gathering and community building at lower cost than many other media of mass communication. At the same time, however, systemic barriers to access and use, along with discriminatory content online that replicates real space axes of discrimination, could prevent women from realizing the full potential of the Internet as a communications medium. Constitutional rights could be used both to undermine and to strengthen women's struggle for e-quality. On one hand, government efforts to restrict or limit online hate speech and obscenity may be challenged as violations of their purveyors' freedom of expression. On the other hand women's rights to freedom of expression and equality could provide a platform for asserting a positive obligation on government to ensure substantively equal access to and participation in Internet communications, especially in relation to online government services and other e-governance initiatives.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.124

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.032
Scholarly communication0.0140.010
Open science0.0020.013
Research integrity0.0080.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.250 · 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
GenreOther

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic Journal→Same topicICT Impact and Policies→French-language works237,207→