MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

El empleo digno de las personas transexuales en Cuba. Análisis a la luz de la nueva Constitución de la República de Cuba

2019· article· es· W2983107949 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dailién Portuondo del Pino, Reynaldo Lam Peña

Bibliographic record

VenueConcienciaDigital · 2019
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Law and Work Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPersonaHumanitiesPolitical scienceCartographyArtGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

El reconocimiento del derecho al empleo digno y la igualdad ante la ley de todas las personas en la nueva Constitución de la República de Cuba, llama a la reformulación normativa en materia laboral en pos de garantizar el ejercicio pleno de este derecho sin discriminación por identidad de género en las personas transexuales. Objetivo. Analizar desde la regulación constitucional, los elementos necesarios para garantizar el pleno acceso al empleo digno de las personas transexuales en Cuba. Metodología. Fueron utilizados distintos métodos investigativos. El método empírico de análisis de documentos, el método teórico jurídico-doctrinal y como técnica de investigación la revisión de documentos. Principales resultados. El derecho al trabajo está reconocido constitucionalmente en Cuba y encuentra pórtico en la dignidad humana. La aparición en el texto constitucional cubano del término “empleo digno” llama a garantizar su disfrute por todos los ciudadanos sin discriminación por identidad de género. Esta nueva concepción necesita de modificaciones normativas en el ámbito laboral y la generación de políticas públicas transversales en materia de género que contribuyan al desarrollo del mandato constitucional.

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)0.003
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.350
Threshold uncertainty score0.696

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConcienciaDigitalSame topicLabor Law and Work DynamicsFrench-language works237,207