Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the significant problems investigated by social scientists in recent years is the question of how power is used in the community. The presence of power has generally been taken for granted; with the main research and analytical effort being concentrated on identifying and explaining the actions of those members of the community, i.e., the leaders, who are thought to possess power. Their ability to operate effectively within the community is generally interpreted as a reflection of their use of power, i.e., their ability to impose their will upon others, with or without having to overcome direct or indirect opposition in the process of doing so. Such studies as have been carried out have usually been conducted in communities which are easily identified as communities, such as a city or a town. There are, however, other types of communities, one of which is the ethnic community or sub-community. Ethnic communities, such as those generally found in Canada, are a result of the desire of the members of specific ethnic groups to continue to share some or all of their activities with people of the same origin. In such communities the actions of the leaders may be based on several factors, none of which is comparable to the power which leaders in other types of communities may possess or are believed to possess. Extensive field work was conducted in the Icelandic ethnic community in the Greater Vancouver area, beginning in the fall of 1965 and continuing for some three years. Data was gathered initially through interviews with the members of this community and subsequently by direct observation of and participation in the activities of this community and its leaders. The analysis of the data obtained indicates that the leaders of such a sub-community do not and cannot relie upon an ability to impose their will upon others. Put in other words, the leaders of such a sub-community lack power. Their ability to operate effectively is largely a result of the fact that their actions vis-a-vis the community are restricted to those which will receive voluntary support from the members of the community.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".