On the Economic Characteristics of Social Science and Related Governmental Function
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social cost is a comparative new conception in economics though it has been undergone wide and thorough studies in social science area. Its related economic analysis is still at its sociological stage. The paper discusses its economic nature: both its social and capital property, evaluates therefore China’s “paradox of social science”, namely the coexistence of “sound” micro social and “weak” macro social capital at the meantime. It analyzes the advantage and function of government in the productive social capital. Key words: social capital; social property; capital property; micro social capital; macro social capital Resume: Le cout social est une nouvelle conception comparative dans l’economie, meme si elle a ete l'objet d'etudes approfondies dans le domaine des sciences sociales. Ses analyses economiques reste encore a son stade sociologique. Le document traite de sa nature economique: non seulement sa propriete mais aussi sa propriete de capitaux et evalue donc le paradoxe de la science sociale de la Chine, a savoir la coexistence d’un micro-capital social favorable et un macro-capital social faible. Il analyse les avantages et les fonctions du gouvernement dans la production du capital social. Mots-cles: le capital social; la propriete sociale; propriete de capitaux; micro capital social; macro capital social 摘 要：社會資本概念在社會學領域已經進行了廣泛和深入的研究，但是在經濟學領域還是一個比較新的概念，當前， 對社會資本的經濟分析還停留在社會學研究的範圍之內。本文分析了社會資本的經濟性質：社會屬性和資本屬性，以這兩個經濟性質為起點從經濟學角度闡述了我國的“社會資本悖論”—“雄厚”的微觀社會資本和“薄弱”的宏觀社會資本同時存在，並論證了政府在生產社會資本中的優勢和作用。 關鍵詞：社會資本; 社會屬性; 資本屬性; 微觀社會資本; 宏觀社會資本
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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; both teacher heads 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".