The Yellow Sweatshirt: Human Dignity and Economic Human Rights in Advanced Industrial Democracies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
THE YELLOW SWEATSHIRT Some years ago on a Saturday morning, I stopped downtown in my economically depressed city of Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, to give a couple of dollars to a youngish man with dirty-blond hair who was asking for money. I noticed that he was wearing a bright yellow sweatshirt and I complimented him on it. He replied that he had received it from his sister for his birthday; she had taken him to the local charity store to buy it. I was surprised – it had not occurred to me that a person who asked strangers for money might have a sister or celebrate his birthdays. In advanced industrial democracies, the poor are largely invisible to the comfortable middle classes; they live in segregated economic zones, send their children to different schools, and patronize different social institutions. Middle-class people such as I can choose to acknowledge them or avoid them when we go to areas they frequent, in the meantime salving our consciences about this most intractable of social problems by giving money to charity or perhaps engaging in volunteer work. The poor's invisibility is one aspect of the indignity they suffer. Even though they enjoy formal legal equality with all other citizens, they are more acted upon than actors, intruders in the world of the autonomous and efficacious. A few among the poor are those who do not wish to work; many more are those who cannot find work.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".