3.C. Workshop: Sex workers health and rights: rethinking law and policy in Europe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Across Europe, sex workers’ health and rights are under threat. Despite well-documented negative consequences of criminalization, several countries have recently adopted or are considering laws that criminalize sex work. The paramount objective of abolishing sex work is often pursued with scant regard for the well-being and rights of individuals who sell sexual services, and law and policy are often developed without input from sex workers. Yet, research and practical lessons from other parts of the world show that decriminalization of sex work is best practice policy in terms of promoting health and rights of sex workers. This panel will discuss recent criminalization efforts in Europe and what Europe may learn from global developments. Presenters and panellists: Niki Adams, English Collective of Prostitutes, United Kingdom Luca Stevenson, International Committee for the Rights of Sex Workers in Europe (ICRSE), The Netherlands Stasa Plecas, Sex Worker’s Rights Advocacy Network, Hungary Kate Shannon, British Columbia Center for Excellence in HIV/AIDS, Canada
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 | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.024 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.005 |
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".