Bibliographic record
Abstract
Those of us who work in the garden of international labour repeatedly hope for a great flowering of global solidarity but usually find only slim harvests. We have become used to a broad gap between the rhetorical promise of global labour movements and the improvements in the lives of workers around the world that such global efforts actually bring. Thus observers of the workings of international labour organizations and of the connections of unions across borders search hard for the small shoots of collaboration that we imagine may someday allow unions to operate effectively in a globalized world. But all too often, we let our hopes overwhelm our analytical minds. The Seattle demonstrations of 1999 inspired this writer and many others with visions of a revitalized global left based on the coalition of a new generation of labour, environmentalist, and social justice activists. This renewed left quickly created ongoing connections through institutions like the World Social Forum as counterparts to those of the global elite and appeared to be having some progressive world effects. Rejecting simplistic protectionism as counterproductive and doomed, leftists spawned proposals for “globalization from below,” to use the title of a hopeful book of the time. Trade unions around the world not only participated in this wider left, but also launched reforms of their own to revitalize the global side of their movement. Cold War divisions fell as one-time Communist labour organizations joined the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (icftu), an organization of national review essay / note critique
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.006 |
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".