Bibliographic record
Abstract
In today's society, although the phenomenon of racial discrimination is much better than before, it is still everywhere in the world. In the current workplace, many black workers are treated differently than others because of their races. They have separate work areas, separate bathrooms, and even the utensils they use are frowned upon by others. Many times blacks suggestions are not accepted. The article will study whether blacks are subjected to racial discrimination in the workplace from six different aspects. Research in this field can help people understand the special treatment that black people receive in the workplace. In addition, the government should pay attention to this phenomenon and make some new legal measures to control and improve the unfair treatment of black people in all aspects of life. Therefore, it is necessary to find and compare the treatment of different races in the workplace. By reading previous relevant articles, this article summarizes and refines the treatment of black people in different aspects of the workplace. It finds that people of this kind of race, no matter how skilled they are or how well they do in their field of work, are treated very poorly compared with white people.
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 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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".