MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080004882 · doi:10.1080/08865655.2010.9695762

Mobile livelihoods—the players involved in smuggling of commodities across the Zimbabwe‐Mozambique border

2010· article· en· W2080004882 on OpenAlex
Nedson Pophiwa

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Borderlands Studies · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican studies and sociopolitical issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLivelihoodState (computer science)ColonialismWork (physics)Political scienceEconomyGeographyEconomicsLawEngineeringAgriculture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The study is spatially located on the Zimbabwe‐Mozambique border and is thematically inclined towards smuggling as a form of mobile livelihood. It explores the rise of smuggling in the post‐colonial era through engaging the different roles played by the state agents and borderland communities as actors involved in smuggling. An attempt is made to zero in on the actual processes at work by exploring the four main actors and their activities regarding smuggling across the Zimbabwe‐Mozambique border, paying particular attention to the experiences of the Penhalonga and Nyaronga communities. It is argued that the cross‐border transactions carried out by the traders in these communities were a means of livelihood and in some instances wealth creation.

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)0.003
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.355 · 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