Combating racial discrimination : affirmative action as a model for Europe
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it