MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W610791400

Combating racial discrimination : affirmative action as a model for Europe

2000· book· en· W610791400 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Erna Appelt, Monika Jarosch

Bibliographic record

VenueBerg eBooks · 2000
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiscrimination and Equality Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffirmative actionRedressRacismInjusticeXenophobiaPoliticsPolitical scienceEconomic JusticeDemocracyEmployment discriminationSociologyLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Europe as well as in other parts of the world, xenophobia and racism are among the unsolved problems of the ending 20th century. Globalization, mass migration and unemployment as well as the need to invent new supra- or crossnational identities require new political answers concerning the problems of inclusion and exclusion.In the United States and in Canada, 'affirmative action' programmes are among those policies which are intended to redress the injustice of discrimination based primarily on race, ethnicity, sex, but also on national origin, religion, or disability.This timely book is the first to present an overview of these hotly debated questions and the anti-discrimination policies in different countries. Experts from the United States, Canada and Europe examine the historical, institutional, judicial and sociological conditions of affirmative action and look at shifting concepts of racism, equality, integration and assimilation. They address the vital questions of whether policies originally created to increase opportunities for African Americans can be applied in Europe; whether the primary goal of 'affirmative action' should be to correct injustice or to safeguard diversity; and whether the democratic ideal of individual equality is at odds with what many perceive as preferential treatment. Moral success but political failure? Compensatory justice or reverse discrimination? This important book evaluates more than thirty years of affirmative action and helps to develop new instruments to deal with the roots and the effects of discrimination.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.015
Scholarly communication0.0090.008
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.134
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBerg eBooksSame topicDiscrimination and Equality LawFrench-language works237,207