Additional Work: Strategies for Adaptation of People in Crisis Period
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the midst of crisis period, Thai economy faces currently in the problem as finding a job what is considered a problem that can not be avoided. Especially, the household economy of Muslims who are agriculturists in the lower southern part of Thailand. This article offers to appreciate the importance of additional work which is the strategic to adaptation of household economy in crisis period. The evaluation relating to the size of additional work, the structure of additional work and the features of additional work. Moreover, this paper suggests, recently, that additional work spread out in terms of private freelance and gradually evolve into main occupation and to become a routine without the expertise of labors. From the mentioned features indicate that the pattern of participation is mostly the activities in the name of the agreement by speech which is considered a lack of formal. It can not deny that the motivation in additional work’s activity from seeking extra revenue according to the relationship with taking time in the main occupation. Therefore, additional work becomes as utilities of individual household economy by recognizing requirement to respond against consumption and family members. Additional work in connection with the pattern of private freelance becomes a stimulating mechanism for the formation of approach of social mobilization, resulting a positive to households in the midst of crisis period.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 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".