Inter-racial Marriages in South Africa
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using the ten percent sample of the 1996 South African census, we examine the rates of intergroup marriage and marriage between linguistic groups in South Africa. Since whites are a small number in South Africa but historically have held most of the power, the analysis provides an interesting context to test the generalizability of theories about inter-racial marriage. We test exchange theory by examining the effects of education on the patterns of intergroup marriage. We do this while controlling for relative group size. Finally, we examine the socioeconomic status of children of mixed marriages to see possible implications of mixed marriages for future generations. Although education is only weakly related to rates of inter-group marriage, it appears to facilitate outmarriage for low-status groups. More minority females than males marry out of their own group, a pattern of intermarriage quite different from that of the United States. This pattern may reflect local norms, or the different racial composition of the two countries. Children of mixed-white marriages appear to do much better economically than children of mixed-black marriages.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it