MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052623802 · doi:10.1521/siso.2011.75.2.180

Monopoly and Crisis in the Era of the "Giant Corporation": Neo-Marxist versus Radical Institutionalist Approaches

2011· article· en· W2052623802 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

VenueScience & Society · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Economy and Marxism
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVeblen goodMonopolyMarxist philosophyCorporationCapitalismNeoclassical economicsEconomicsCompetition (biology)Value (mathematics)Political scienceMarket economyLawFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two competing tendencies in American radical economics developed in reaction to the emergence of the modern corporation: an institutionalist tendency associated with Thorstein Veblen, and a neo-Marxian one associated with Paul Sweezy and Paul Baran. How do their theories compare? Although the two tendencies have different starting points — one empirical and the other more abstract — they end up with remarkably similar ideas, particularly regarding competition, monopoly and the corporation. And while they diverge somewhat on the issue of crisis, these differences are neither irreconcilable nor a result of fundamentally different theoretical approaches. In fact, the two tendencies are surprisingly similar in the end precisely because Baran and Sweezy adopt some core Veblenian ideas, requiring a parallel shift away from the core elements of Marx's systematic analysis of capitalism: his method and his theory of value.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.720
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.008
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.171 · 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