Bibliographic record
Abstract
English The article explores the privatization of social work in both England and Canada. Although differences persist in the structural organization of social services in both countries, it is argued that such disparities are increasingly blurred by radical market reforms of the social work labour process (among other changes). French Cet article étudie la privatisation du travail social en Angleterre et au Canada. Même s'il subsiste des différences quant à l'organisation des services sociaux dans ces deux pays, cette étude soutient que ces différences s'estompent de plus en plus en raison des réformes de marché radicales qui s'opèrent notamment en ce qui concerne le traitement de la main-d'œuvre en travail social. Spanish Se explora la privatización en Inglaterra y Canadá. Aunque perduran las diferencias respecto a la organización estructural de los servicios sociales en ambos países, se arguye que tales diferencias se oscurecen cada vez más por las reformas radicales derivadas del mercado de los procesos laborales del trabajo social (entre otros cambios).
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 | 0.009 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.003 |
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".