MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2574586965

Disability and the employer's duty - a comparison with Ontario, Canada : employment law

2016· article· en· W2574586965 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Natalie Harten

Bibliographic record

VenueWithout Prejudice · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiscrimination and Equality Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDutyUnemploymentLabour economicsLabour lawJob lossPromotion (chess)Disability benefitsBusinessPolitical scienceDemographic economicsLawEconomicsEconomic growthSocial security
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Disability is often accompanied by unemployment, lower wages, poorer working conditions and barriers to promotion both in South Africa and abroad. Many employers tend to exclude and marginalise employees with disabilities, not merely because their disability impairs the employees' suitability for employment but also because the employer regards the disability as an abnormality or flaw. Sadly, these individuals are frequently refused employment or dismissed, rather than accommodated.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score0.925

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0230.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWithout PrejudiceSame topicDiscrimination and Equality LawFrench-language works237,207