MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Social policy, freedom and individuality

2004· article· en· W2078856598 on OpenAlex
Anna Yeatman

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

VenueAustralian Journal of Public Administration · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Economy and Marxism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExpansiveScarcityCoercion (linguistics)Social policyLaw and economicsState (computer science)Public policySubject (documents)Political scienceEconomicsPolitical economySociologyEconomic systemLawMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Contemporary social policy lacks an account of the ends it serves. The reason for this is a laissez‐faire policy regime where property right overwhelms the right of each individual to be a self‐determining person. Laissez‐faire policy creates a scarcity of public resources where a universalistic social policy cannot be afforded. A narrowly targeted social policy designed for the poor prevails: it is one where the poor are subject to state coercion. In the more expansive social policy associated with social democracy, the outcome of equality is championed but there is no coherent account of how this end can be reconciled with achieving freedom. The universal idea of the self‐determining person is the basis of a rationale for social policy. Thus the end that social policy should serve is the development and sustaining of an individual who has the set of capabilities that he or she requires to be free in the sense of self‐determining.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.556
Threshold uncertainty score0.298

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.291 · 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