Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are two ways of comprehending child development. The first one stresses the cultural essence of man. It regards the child as a human being that has not yet acquired culture and is faced with the task of its acquisition. The important part of culture is the system of norms, including various means and patterns, the so-called ‘ideal forms’. The bearer of these ideal forms and culture is the adult. The zone of proximal development is not for inventing new forms of culture, but for mastering the norms that already exist. Another approach sees the child as an individual with endless, limitless abilities. Thus the task that arises before the adult is to ensure that the child’s potential is fulfilled. This implies reaching out beyond the limits of the zone of proximal development as the abilities are limitless. And that, in turn, implies another space, aimed at new forms of culture which have not yet existed. We have called this the space of child actualization. In this space, the child’s role is the leading one. In its very sense this space is the opposite of the zone of proximal development where the acquisition of the old norms occurs (i.e. the assimilation of the child into culture); on the contrary, the space of actualization is a place where new norms are created, where the adult helps the child to implement the latter’s intentions, and where culture is assimilated into the child.
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 | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.051 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".