MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2490712615 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511527753.006

Personal and Group Relative Deprivation: Connecting the ‘I’ to the ‘We’

2001· book-chapter· en· W2490712615 on OpenAlexaffabout
Françine Tougas, Ann M. Beaton

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2001
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkforceAffirmative actionAction (physics)Representation (politics)Race (biology)Relative deprivationBusinessPolitical scienceLabour economicsDemographic economicsPublic relationsPsychologySocial psychologyGender studiesSociologyEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When it was recognized that some groups (e.g., women and African Americans) were unfairly treated in the workforce, the Canadian and American governments, to name a few, took action via affirmative action programs to remedy the situation. These programs include strategies to eliminate systemic barriers and achieve fair representation of target group members at all levels and in every sector of the labor market. This entails profound social changes as members of designated groups access jobs they were previously denied on the basis of such characteristics as race or sex.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations46
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicLabor Movements and UnionsFrench-language works237,207