MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3187033669 · doi:10.24144/2663-5399.2020.2.05

PROBLEMS OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF GENDER EQUALITY (COMPARATIVE LEGAL ASPECT)

2021· article· en· W3187033669 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

VenueConstitutional Legal Academic Studies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Studies and Reforms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGender equalityHuman rightsScope (computer science)Economic JusticePolitical scienceEuropean unionLawLaw and economicsSociologyGender studiesEconomicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of the study is to identify the problems in the implementation of the principle of gender equality in Ukraine and European states.
 This goal was achieved through the application of a system of methods, including comparative method, formal law method and statistical method.
 The study has identified that the principle of gender equality prohibits discriminatory treatment on the basis of gender in different spheres of social relations. However, there is no single approach to understanding the concept of gender equality, which is described as: equality between the rights of men and women; fair treatment of men and women; equal access to resources and their fair distribution between men and women.
 It is substantiated that the principle of gender equality is a sub-principle of the principle of equality and means guaranteeing equal rights and opportunities regardless of gender.
 The principle of gender equality is examined in international law, including the provisions of the Council of Europe's Gender Equality Strategy for 2018-2023 and their implementation in Ukraine. The European Court of Human Rights' (ECtHR) practice of interpreting the content of the principle of gender equality and its scope is analyzed. The ECtHR has established that gender-based violence is the form of discrimination against women.
 The Court of Justice of the European Union has established the elimination of discrimination on grounds of sex as a general principle of EU law which should be guaranteed by a court.
 Family policy models in different states have been studied through the prism of gender equality, in particular: the pronatalist model (formed in France); the traditional model (historically originated in Germany); a pro-egalitarian model (Sweden is a typical representative); family model (mainly applied in the UK, the US and Canada). It is justified that nowadays, mixed models of family policy prevail, which combine traditional models in different proportions. In Ukraine, there is a similarly mixed model of family policy model that can be characterised as more pro-natalist model.
 The study concludes that real gender equality can be achieved in the case of an effective gender-based public policy, which should: stimulate gender expertise; introduce quotas for representation of women in all areas of employment, except those that may harm their health; ensure that gender components are taken into account in all economic and social development programs; introduce a gender component through the educational process in the secondary, vocational and higher education system; ensure gender mainstreaming in teacher training programs and public officials; promote the elimination of gender stereotypes and counteract discrimination; contribute to reducing the remuneration gap; to promote the activities of public associations in the field of gender equality and combating domestic violence, etc.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.922
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.288 · 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