MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944839730 · doi:10.7146/sl.v0i71.107308

Kontanthjælpsmodtagerens kritiske register

2015· article· en· W2944839730 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mathias Herup Nielsen

Bibliographic record

VenueSlagmark - Tidsskrift for idéhistorie · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Policy and Reform Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Oxford
KeywordsRetrenchmentNewspaperNormativePoliticsSociologyPolitical sciencePolitical economyPublic administrationLawMedia studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article investigates different acts of political protests currently floating from unemployed citizens who are being affected by recent retrenchment policy reforms. Whereas most of the existing literature tends to portray political protest as either collective and public or individual and private, this article attempts instead to shed light on the plurality of normative resources activated by the unemployed in a highly critical situation. Thereby the analysis moves between the collective and the individual as well as between the public and the private. Using the theoretical framework developed by Laurent Thévenot and Luc Boltanski in their joint work on justification, the article analyses a specific case, namely unemployed Danish recipients of social assistance who are affected by a new policy initiative meaning that their income has been lowered. Drawing on newspaper articles and qualitative in-depth interviews with affected citizens, the analysis unfolds and theorizes upon three very different forms of protesting: a civic, an industrial and a domestic form of resistance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.206

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0620.020

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.

Opus teacher head0.181
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSlagmark - Tidsskrift for idéhistorieSame topicSocial Policy and Reform StudiesFrench-language works237,207