Sharpening the Lens: Recent Research on Cultural Policy, Cultural Diversity, and Social Cohesion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many of the assumptions surrounding "culture, connectedness, and social cohesion" must be held up to sharper scrutiny, including the nostalgia for a return to simpler times, when cultural consensus and social cohesion seemed easier to achieve. The challenge is not one of "repairing fractured cohesion" or "renewing civil society," but rather of envisioning a new civic realm where diversity is supported by more empirically grounded foundations for claims regarding the interconnections amongst these phenomena. Although we must acknowledge the enormous power of globalizing markets and communications systems, we also need to resist a simplistic equation of these factors with homogenizing cultural trends. Our current discourses related to culture, diversity, and social cohesion require a complete rethinking before we can proceed with policies to respond effectively.
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 | 0.017 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.083 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.022 | 0.025 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
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.
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".