Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent yean, there has been a growing interest in analyzing the political and economic changes that have occurred under late capitalism Anthropologists and sociologists alike have suggested that one of the key changes that has taken place in the international organization of capitalism has been the shift from a mass "Fordut" system of industrial organization to globalized or "Post‐Fordist" regimes of flexible accumulation. It has been argued that shift has not only reshaped the material realities of peoples' everyday lives but they have also altered the ways in which people constitute themselves as collective subjects. Universalist forms of identification such as class, so it is argued have given way to a series of new forms of affiliation involving national ties, regionalism, ties of ethnic affinity and detemtorialized forms of solidarity While the appearance of new forms of affiliation have undoubtedly surfaced along with the large scale transformations of late capitalism, the extent to which they have overridden old forms of identity is the subject of much debate. In this paper. I will argue it may be premature to jettison the notion of class in any attempt to understand the dynamics of contemporary social world. Rather what is needed are attempts to problematize class identity and, indeed class relations in their complex relationship to emergent particularistic forms of affiliation. Drawing on research amongst the family farmers in rural Languedoc, who often engaged in militant forms of regional activism. Otis paper then argues, that class, especially in its complex relations to region, remains core in structuring collective identities in the context of late capitalism
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".