The Concept of State Responsibility in Fulfilling the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in the Manpower Sector in Indonesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to analyze the implementation of state responsibilities in fulfilling the rights of persons with disabilities in the field of employment in Indonesia and the supporting and inhibiting factors of the state in fulfilling the rights of persons with disabilities in the field of employment. The method used in this research is normative legal research, with legal studies using legal systematics, research that will synchronize regulations, and make comparisons with applicable laws and use legal history. The study results found that the state fulfills the rights of persons with disabilities in the field of employment by providing protection and fulfillment of the rights of persons with disabilities. Supporting factors for social movements in voicing the fulfillment of the rights of persons with disabilities, which are accommodated by the Indonesian Association of Persons with Disabilities, are supporting factors for the fulfillment of facilities for persons with disabilities in public spaces. The inhibiting factor is that the fulfillment of the rights of people with other disabilities is still lacking; it is proven that facilities for people with disabilities often make the facilities that have been built at several points ineffective and ineffective. The concept of state responsibility in fulfilling the rights of persons with disabilities in the field of employment in Indonesia to obtain work and a decent living for humanity is a constitutional right guaranteed in the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".