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
This article brings attention to the rarefied world of elite boarding schools. Despite their reputation for excellence, these unique educational institutions remain largely outside the gaze of educational researchers and the scope of public debates about education. One reason for this absence is a lack of knowledge about what exactly defines an elite boarding school and the characteristics that stand them apart from other schools in significant ways. Drawing on a review of the relevant literature, the article outlines five criteria by which elite boarding schools can be identified: typologically elite, scholastically elite, historically elite, geographically elite, and demographically elite. Although the “elite” status of any given school in any of these criteria may be open to debate, it is the particular combination of these five dimensions that defines an elite boarding school. After a discussion of these five characteristics, the article outlines some implications for future research that considers elite boarding schools as an integral part of the educational system in the United States and presents some of the challenges facing the study of privilege.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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