MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2741727799

La contribución de los sindicatos en la Norma ISO 26 000 para la responsabilidad social de las organizaciones: Legitimidad y reivindicaciones en la administración mundial del trabajo

2017· article· es· W2741727799 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueActualidad Contable FACES · 2017
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldEngineering
TopicSustainable Design and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceGeographyWelfare economicsPhilosophyEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La presente investigación, explora la contribución de los sindicatos en la\nconstrucción de la norma ISO 26 000 (2010), y la consecuente legitimidad de este\ndocumento en la gestión mundial del trabajo. Una exhaustiva revisión de alrededor\nde cinco mil comentarios del Committee 05. Working area y la interpretación neoinstitucional\nde la Escuela de Montreal de la responsabilidad social de las empresas\nse encuentran en la base de la argumentación. El resultado general es que en la NISO\n26 000, las principales reivindicaciones de los sindicatos se encuentran subsumidas\na la ideología administrativa dejando a la discreción privada de las empresas su\ncumplimiento. En consecuencia, la legitimidad de la NISO 26 000 se encuentra\nseriamente afectada.

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.546
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.277 · 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