Building a Bioscience Workforce: The Southeast Versus the Vanguard States
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The biotechnology industry is extraordinarily concentrated: five states account for nearly half of all biotechnology firms. California accounts for almost a quarter of all firms while Massachusetts accounts for just over one-tenth of all firms. Viewing the biotechnology industry as a leading sector for creating high-quality growth, many states have initiated public policies aimed at growing the industry at home and capturing a greater share of the national pie. In a comparative analysis with these two vanguard states, we examine public strategies initiated during the last two decades to promote the development of the biotech industry in three states in the Southeast: Florida, Georgia and North Carolina. Biotechnicians represent the largest number of workers in this industry, hold the greatest promise for geographic diffusion throughout the Southeast, and constitute a largely unexamined sector. The extent to which workforce-training strategies are successful typically depends on clustering and network building with industry leaders.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it