MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Status of women in highly literate societies: the case of Kerala and Finland

2006· article· en· W2020063966 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLiteracy · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Economic Development in India
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLiteracyRealmLiteracy rateSocial statusDeveloping countryEconomic growthAdult literacySociologyPolitical scienceSocioeconomicsGender studiesSocial sciencePedagogyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Both Kerala and Finland have made notable achievements in the realm of literacy: Kerala has one of the highest rates in the developing world and Finland ranks first in literacy among developed countries. Both also share a cultural history of granting women a high status in their respective societies. Using Kerala and Finland as examples, this paper explores the status of women in highly literate societies in both the developing and developed worlds, looking not only at the historical circumstances in which these conditions developed but also at the outcomes associated with them. This paper argues that literacy rates and female status are interconnected: each impacts on the other, as high female status contributes to improved literacy rates and educational and life opportunities, while high female literacy rates result in increased social standing for women. Such synergy produces outcomes beneficial to a society, regardless of its developmental status.

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.

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)0.001
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 score0.519
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.261 · 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