Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coming from the notions of AmartyaSen and Robert Chambers, on poverty as "capability deprivation" and "absence of well-being", this study seeks to portray a "political face" of the poor's condition. Beyond the usual depiction of the poor as living below the "poverty line" what kind of lives do they have in the much larger landscape of the structure of power relations? How do they position themselves vis-a-vis the powerful politicians and how do they understand themselves as actors of political processes such as elections? The study believes that beyond the totalizing views of poverty in mainstream social science scholarship, the poor's portrayal and understanding of their own condition must be considered, not to replace the existing explanations and views but in order to interrogate and eventually enrich some of its assumptions. A particular village, i.e. Pasil is used as a case in order to provide an empirical illustration of the study. The said village is located in Cebu City, a bigger proportion of which is a slum area. Methodologically, the study uses qualitative data collection techniques such as Focus Group Discussion and Key Informant Interview; socio-political analysis and analyis of interview and discussion transcriptions are part of the interpretive process.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.034 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".