Bibliographic record
Abstract
[What I’ve written above] sounds to me like a call, to return to [seeking] for a socialist alternative to the commanding global hegemony of capitalism.” So I conclude a central section of my new book Revolutionary Traveller: Freeze-Frames from a Life.2 Yet the need to follow such a course is more easily asserted than proven—not least, on one hand, in light of the notorious failures of various attempted “socialisms” throughout the last century, and, on the other, the apparent vitality, despite its current “crisis,” of global capitalism’s stranglehold on the poorest of the world’s poor. What can we say in defense of a socialist project, especially for the global South? I will begin, in the first section, by interrogating two recent attempts to refuse (or ignore) a socialist possibility, and then, in a second section, look more closely at some of the claims that might continue to be made, with a straight face, on socialism’s behalf, especially with reference to Africa, the region of my own most intensive focus.“
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 | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.058 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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 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".