Bibliographic record
Abstract
After reading Angela Davis's Are Prisons Obsolete?I was again reminded that the standard held out for anything other than the current criminal "justice system"whose central theme is punishment and whose monolithic structure is imprisonment is one of comparative perfection.I was also reminded of two central messages in Thomas Mathiesen's "The Unfinished": 3 that we cannot merely replace one system with another and that the work of striving for equality and justice is an evolution of inter-related and sometimes symbiotic processes.There is abundant evidence that the current system of punishment and imprisonment is out of control and ineffective as a means of rendering more people equal, safe, secure, and otherwise free.Nevertheless, there seems to be a presumption that before replacing any of this outdated, ineffective, destructive, and obsolete system, we must first discover, create, or otherwise imagine an alternative one that is first proven to be effective and all-encompassing.In this wonderfully digestible, and therefore accessible, new book, Angela Davis further supports the abolition argument and provides some very clear and tangible reasons to further examine the impact of the prison industrial complex, rather than continuing with prison reform.It is clear that imprisonment has become the normative criminal justice response and that prison is an irrevocable assumption.As Ms. Davis clearly articulates, the inducement of moral panics, fear-and hate-mongering is also integral to the punishment and imprisonment industry.Those with the power and resources
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.020 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".