Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the relationship between stratification and work in contemporary logistics from two theoretical angles. The first involves an analysis of the utility of the model of primary versus secondary labour markets as a template for assessing the core characteristics of logistics’ work. The second involves a parallel assessment of the salience of post-modern theories of time for an understanding of how such work is structured. Logistics involves the movement of goods and information by road, rail, sea and air. High levels of surveillance and control are embedded within these flows. These are critical for the creation of value via the supply of commodities to industrial, personal and commercial customers at the exact time desired by them. This has involved a paradigmatic shift in economic production from the Fordist system, whereby goods were manufactured in long production runs and then pushed up the supply chain to retailers, to a post-Fordist system, whereby production is determined directly by consumer demand. The world of transportation and warehousing has suffered from systematic neglect by sociologists. Part of this lies in a deep seated Marxist bias within the field whereby factory work is characterized as “productive” and somehow more significant and authentic, whereas the worlds of transportation and distribution are seen as “unproductive” and far less important.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.051 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".