Bibliographic record
Abstract
Good (ethical and effective) global public leadership—by national politicians, intergovernmental and nongovernmental international organizational leaders, multinational corporate leaders, and technoscientists—will make a significant positive difference in our global system’s capacity to solve contemporary and futuristic global problems. High levels of social, economic, political, and ethical vision; expert communication; strategic thinking; and contextual and emotional intelligence by leaders and followers will be needed to interpret global problematic situations and contexts, determine the probable causal mechanisms at work in bringing about global problems, and arrive at global, national, and local solutions. We live in dangerous times. For our globalizing—disseminating and converging—technologies present problems and system-destroying possibilities that challenge the common goods of all humanity, other species, and the biosphere. In these uncertain and complex times, the need for effective and ethical democratic leaders, advised by ethical and creative technoscientific leaders, is greater than ever. The contextual intelligence and other excellent (virtuous) qualities of these leaders, and the lack of bad leadership, will help our globalizing human societies avoid the greatest systemic dangers we face.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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".