Remaking Citizenship, Unmaking Marginalization: The Treatment Action Campaign in Post-Apartheid South Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article se concentre sur les formes innovatrices de participation civique, encouragée par le Treatment Action Campaign (TAC), groupe d’activistes du SIDA qui facilite des formes innovatrices de participation civique. Il multiplie ses activités, allant des institutions intermédiaires entre l’état et les pauvres, aux formes de participation plus transitoires, non institutionnelles dans des espaces créés par les marginalisés eux-mêmes. Soutenus par le TAC, les gens se sentent capables d’agir indépendamment de l’état et de le contester. Cet article soutient que, au fur et à mesure que les espaces de participation sont plus souvent modelés par les pauvres eux-mêmes qu’offerts par des acteurs extérieurs, ils mettent en évidence, d’une part les difficultés rencontrées quand on cherche à maintenir de nouvelles stratégies démocratiques de pouvoir, d’autre part, le potentiel de ces politiques en défis, d’une portée considérable, lancés à la marginalisation politique.
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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; 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".