Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nine papers with respective replies, grounded in Marxist traditions, analyse the potential for social transformation through a reinvigorated radical Left, all within the context of the ascendance of the far Right worldwide. Papers variously take up new lines of analysis, while also identifying and theorizing strategies and possibilities for increasing and deepening popular participation and support on the far Left. Authors are drawn variously from Australia, Britain, Canada, Cyprus, France, Greece, Ireland, Japan, Slovenia, and the United States. They comprise new scholars as well as established and leading theorists and activists. Collectively, the papers address three predominant themes: the changing and expanding conceptualization on the Left of contemporary capitalism; what it means to speak of ‘the people’ in relation to political action today; and approaches to mobilizing and organizing that people. The wide-ranging but focused and rigorous insights produced across the pieces are aimed at speaking to scholars, students, observers, and activists who seek knowledge about the challenges and opportunities the Left faces today.
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 | 0.009 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.024 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.017 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.003 |
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".