MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2465987598 · doi:10.1057/9780230374584_9

Race Relations in New Britain

2000· book-chapter· en· W2465987598 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yasmin Alibhai‐Brown

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · 2000
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRace, History, and American Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationRace (biology)DutyPolitical scienceInequalityLawQuarter (Canadian coin)Government (linguistics)Law and economicsSociologyGender studiesHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

‘The law,’ said Martin Luther King, ‘does not change the heart — but it does restrain the heartless.’ But on both sides of the Atlantic, those who pushed through anti-discrimination legislation, including King, had far greater ambitions than this minimalist view would suggest. The 1975 Home Office White Paper Race Discrimination states: ‘Legislation is the essential precondition for an effective policy to combat the problems experienced by the coloured minority groups and to promote equality of opportunity and treatment. It is a necessary pre-condition to deal with explicit discriminatory actions or accumulated disadvantages Elsewhere the paper also declares: ‘It is the Government’s duty to prevent … morally unacceptable and socially divisive inequalities from hardening into entrenched patterns. It is inconceivable that Britain in the last quarter of the 20th century should confess herself unable to secure for a small minority of … coloured citizens their full and equal rights as individual men and women.’ 1 These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.253
Threshold uncertainty score0.502

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.002

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations4
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooksSame topicRace, History, and American SocietyFrench-language works237,207