Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Havana a fit place to sit and reflect on the revolution is on the park bench next to the sitting statue of John Lennon. A society like the one he imagined is taking shape in the Cuban archipelago. The academic and popular discussion of Cuba in the United States mostly misses the key point: the revolution is achieving a new form of democracy based upon shared social goals. These priorities were enunciated during the 1959 political void left by the almost complete collapse of the old order symbolized by Fulgencio Batista. The original revolutionary objectives have been upheld ever since. This constancy, together with inspirational leadership and the control of corruption, has provided a level of consensus sufficient for the revolution to endure while socialist systems elsewhere fell apart. Basic continuing priorities are mutual assistance, education for all, employment, universal health care, housing, dignified retirement, the promotion of art, a humanitarian international role for Cuba, and public participation in public life. Essentially, all of this is now reality. Three striking indicators are that Cuban student performance is well above that of any other Latin American country, public health statistics have reached the developedcountry range, and 85 percent of families own their own dwellings. For the first time there is a Latin American country in which it is normal for all to be healthy and educated. This has been accomplished by hard work and consumerist denial sustained for almost a half century. But 2005 is a turning-point year for the revolution. At last, more material rewards are at hand. This is because of government policy and international cooperation with-particularly-Venezuela, China, Canada, and Spain. The government's decision to switch from the dollar to the euro as a legal circulating currency was accompanied by a calling in of tucked-away dollars to be changed into convertible pesos if they were not to be discounted 10
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.090 | 0.022 |
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".