Older people, discrimination and citizenship: What specific insights in light of disability law on the national and international level?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our research first delves into the complexity of ageism in law to understand to what extent the existing legal norms are sufficient to encounter the stereotypes linked to old age and the individual as well as systemic discrimination which ensues. According to European and national case law, age is an ambiguous ground of discrimination law and masks the complexity of age discrimination. It seems the scope of the UN Convention on the Rights of People with disabilities overlaps with some difficulties of older people in terms of rights but the CRPD also illustrates how an international convention can be a game changer, creating an impetus to gain insight on the particular characteristics of disability, but not age. The concept of disability discrimination has in turn enriched the way we think of discrimination in a more relational way. In order to prove the inadequacies of the current international legal framework on the human rights of older people, the second part of our study will illustrate how the right to vote exemplifies the challenges of age discrimination in terms of citizenship and full participation of older people in the democratic process, demonstrating the need to adopt a tailored international convention for older individuals.
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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".