Bibliographic record
Abstract
It now seems to me less important that the domestic bourgeoisie should be efficient – technically, financially or otherwise – as capitalists, as individual accumulators, than they should be competent politically as a class: that they should, as a class, recognise the requirements of capital accumulation for capital as a whole and be able to see to it that these requirements are met. In the late summer of 1981, in a hot and sticky Washington DC, staff members of the World Bank were strategizing how best to release a report entitled Accelerated Development in Sub-Saharan Africa . Some were nervous about how the report might be received – and rightly so. The content of those 200-odd pages proved highly controversial. They would also be enormously consequential, reshaping the role of the state in economies across the developing world for decades to come. In sub-Saharan Africa, the impact of the report would be directly felt through policies of structural adjustment that linked access to development finance to a neo-liberal set of economic policies. Africa's growth prospects, the report argued, had been curtailed by the overreach of the state; what was needed instead was a greater role for unfettered market forces and for the private sector. The report represented nothing less than an agenda to revolutionize the respective roles of the public and private sectors in African economies. The attempt to implement that agenda, however, produced uneven results.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.057 | 0.009 |
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".