Bibliographic record
Abstract
English This exploratory research undertook in-depth interviews with seven practitioners in Lahore. The data revealed five themes regarding culturally respectful practice in Pakistan, related to definition of social work; primacy of family and community; innovative local approaches; and social structures necessary for effective interventions. We consider strategies for making social work knowledge more authentically indigenous to Pakistan. French Cette recherche exploratoire consiste en des entrevues en profondeur auprès de sept praticiens à Lahore. Les données recueillies ont permis de dégager cinq thèmes ayant trait à une pratique respectueuse de la culture pakistanaise. Ces thèmes portaient sur la définition du travail social; l’importance de la famille et de la communauté ; les approches locales innovantes; et les structures sociales appropriées pour des interventions efficaces. La recherche aborde également les stratégies à mettre en oeuvre pour développer un savoir en travail social plus particulier au Pakistan. Spanish Esta investigació n exploratoria emprendió entrevistas en profundidad con siete profesionales en Lahore. Los datos revelan cinco temas, respecto a la prá ctica culturalmente respetuosa en Paquistá n, relativa a la definició n del trabajo social; primacía de la familia y la comunidad; enfoques locales innovadores; y las estructuras sociales necesarias para intervenciones efectivas. Consideramos estrategias para hacer el conocimiento en trabajo social má s auténticamente autó ctono en Paquistá n.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".