MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3034435400 · doi:10.1177/1044207320932277

Disability Policy and Active Citizenship: The Case of Australia’s National Disability Insurance Scheme

2020· article· en· W3034435400 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Disability Policy Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealthcare innovation and challenges
Canadian institutionsCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCitizenshipActive citizenshipMedical model of disabilityDisability insuranceWelfareState (computer science)Welfare statePolitical sciencePublic administrationPublic relationsPublic economicsEconomic growthMedicineEconomicsLawPsychiatryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we illustrate how Australia’s new National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) extends the active citizenship of people with disabilities. This is done by examining how the NDIS changes their relation between persons with disabilities and to the welfare state, and through an analysis of its eligibility criteria and needs assessment planning. The support provided and the way in which it is provided reproduce a particular understanding of disability that has a direct influence on the roles assigned to people with disabilities in society as well as on their opportunities to exercise their rights as active citizens. This is important because the implementation of NDIS in Australia is likely to influence the development of disability policy on a global level. Understanding how its mechanisms restricts or facilitates citizenship is therefore crucial.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.008
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 head0.276
GPT teacher head0.498
Teacher spread0.221 · 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