MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037182540 · doi:10.1177/0020715207079529

Globalization

2007· article· en· W2037182540 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
John W. Meyer

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Comparative Sociology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Development and Aid
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobalizationInterdependencePolitical economyPolitical sciencePoliticsRationalityWelfare stateHuman rightsSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the Second World War, there has been a steadily increasing awareness of a global society, and of national interdependencies in this society. The catastrophes of the war (and earlier Depression) and the extraordinary violations of human rights and welfare are involved. So are rapid decolonization, and political and economic interdependencies. Consciousness of a global society, however, has led to nothing like a world state, so all the much-perceived interdependencies lead to global movements to control the national and social actors that are understood to carry the burden of social control. Thus world culture has created wave after wave of somewhat standardized national policies, committing countries to the pursuit of collective progress and individual welfare and equality, and to international cooperation. The political logic here is one of natural law, not positive law, since there is no world state. Extraordinary expansions of world political society result — an explosion in the use of science, and various principles of standardized social rationality, and dramatic emphases on individual rights, welfare, and empowerment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.353

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1060.016

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.373 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations125
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Comparative SociologySame topicInternational Development and AidFrench-language works237,207