MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992210801 · doi:10.12927/whp.2009.21138

Human Nomenclature: From Race to Racism

2009· article· en· W1992210801 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Carlos Zúbaran

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld health & population · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRace, Genetics, and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
KeywordsRace (biology)RacismRace and healthPsychometrics of racismCategorizationEthnic groupConstruct (python library)YardstickHarassmentPsychologySociologySocial psychologySocioeconomic statusPopulationEpistemologyDemographyGender studiesAnthropologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Throughout time, evolutionary biologists have attempted to classify human beings according to a nomenclature based on supposed patterns of biological differences that have been used to suggest hierarchical categories. Recent genetic evidence disproves the assumption that races are genetically distinct human populations. Several studies refute human categorization as a severely flawed yardstick. For many, race is a construct that must be overcome in order to eradicate racism. Personal experiences of racism, harassment and discrimination are associated with multiple indicators of poorer physical and mental health status. Additionally, socio-economic differentials are likely to be a fundamental explanation for the observed inequalities in health status among minority groups. This commentary examines the discrepancies that race, ethnicity and similar human nomenclatures present. Furthermore, the potentially harmful consequences of the "scientific" use of race, in the form of stereotyping and racism, are discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.774
Threshold uncertainty score0.586

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.308 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld health & populationSame topicRace, Genetics, and SocietyFrench-language works237,207