Bibliographic record
Abstract
The legal and judicial investigation of jobs with the priority for women is the title of an article that tries, with regard to the issue that women are created to do some different activities from men and there are physical and psychological differences between women and men and considering the time and place conditions and due to this matter that the maternal critical task and breeding the powerful generations have been laid upon them by the creation act, to rank the jobs and introduce some activities with the priority for women including the health, medical and education services, total professional services, activities in the media and the press in field of the women, rescuing activities and charitable actions.On the one hand, this study has stated the base of such priorities including the characteristics of women, the benefits or interests of couples and families (with regard to the matter that the primary roles of women are housekeeping, maternal activities and raising the children), the need to woman obeying from her husband and having no responsibility in the livelihood of the family; and on the other hand, considering the living conditions of today required women work along with men in advancing the common goals and realizing the eminent human and divine ideals and trying to acquire the sciences and education and different social activities and they need to get educated and work outside their houses.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.961 | 0.942 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".