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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Age is a critical issue for labour market policy. Both younger and older workers experience significant challenges at work. Despite the introduction of age discrimination laws, ageism remains prevalent. This book offers a roadmap for the future development of age discrimination law in common law countries, to better address workplace ageism. Drawing on theoretical, doctrinal, and empirical legal scholarship, and comparative perspectives from the United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada, the book provides a grounded critique of existing age discrimination laws and their enforcement, and puts forward concrete suggestions for legal reform and change. It examines the challenges and limitations of existing legal frameworks and the individual enforcement model for addressing age discrimination in employment, mapping the stages of claiming, negotiation, or alternative dispute resolution, and hearing and judgment, using mixed method case studies of the enforcement of age discrimination law in the United Kingdom and Australia. The book puts forward a fourfold model of reform to strengthen age discrimination law, to improve the individual enforcement model, strengthen positive equality duties, bolster the roles of statutory equality agencies, and enhance collective enforcement. The book critically considers how these options might address the limits of existing laws, and the practical measures necessary to ensure their success.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 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 it