MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4238966088 · doi:10.1163/24522031-12340005

Racial Discrimination

2019· article· en· W4238966088 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tanya Katerí Hernández

Bibliographic record

VenueBrill Research Perspectives in Comparative Discrimination Law · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiscrimination and Equality Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobeRace (biology)Strengths and weaknessesVariety (cybernetics)Political scienceLawBrillOrder (exchange)RacismSociologyGender studiesHistoryPsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This fifth volume in the Brill Research Perspectives in Comparative Discrimination Law surveys the field of comparative race discrimination law for the purpose of providing an introduction to the nature of comparing systems of discrimination and the transnational search for effective equality laws and policies. This volume includes the perspectives of racialized subjects (subalterns) in the examination of the reach of the laws on the ground. It engages a variety of legal and social science resources in order to compare systems across a number of contexts (such as the United States, Canada, France, South Africa, Brazil, Colombia, Peru, Hong Kong, Japan, Korea, Israel, India, and others). The goal is to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of various kinds of anti-discrimination legal devices to aid in the study of law reform efforts across the globe centered on racial equality.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.135

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0400.004

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 head0.323
GPT teacher head0.537
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrill Research Perspectives in Comparative Discrimination LawSame topicDiscrimination and Equality LawFrench-language works237,207