Bibliographic record
Abstract
The myth of meritocracy is based on the idea that those with the ability will succeed in society and be justly rewarded. However, the educational and professional worlds in which traditional meritocracy operates are not open to everyone or without any barriers. ere are numerous obstacles to entry, which are not simply determined by an individual’s “abilities” and aptitudes, but by cultural and spatial restrictions in addition to legal and institutional restrictions. Especially in Korea, with the introduction of modern laws, certain people with disabilities were labeled as incompetent and faced numerous restrictions. These restrictions led to preferential treatment, restrictions on occupational and academic qualications, and eugenic restrictions. Those who were socially incapacitated but perceived as dangerous, such as the mentally disabled and vagrants, were actively segregated from society, making it impossible for them to enter the meritocratic arena, and they relied on métis, not technology, for their collective survival. As Korean society entered the international community, many anti-human rights regulations were gradually abolished, and as society’s democracy and human rights awareness increased, some of these restrictions were removed through the New Civil Code, the process of building a democratic society, and the struggle for the rights of people with disabilities. People whose abilities were restricted by law have begun to enter a social arena where they can fulfill their abilities through past social struggles, international norms, and social democracy.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".