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
Africa’s borders have a poor reputation. Even today, some say that they are arbitrary and absurd, porous and undermined, indefensible and undefended. Yet the principle of intangibility of borders, agreed by the Organization of African Unity (OAU) in 1964, has held, with rare exceptions. The time has come to put paid to the enduring myth that the scars of colonialism are responsible for all of Africa’s troubles. This assertion about the disadvantageous consequences of Africa’s borders is just one of a number of received ideas, others being the absence of any pre-colonial political boundaries, and the lack of consideration shown by Europeans to pre-existing geopolitical realities. Certainly, there is often too little demarcation, though much progress has been made, but Africa’s borders act as creative interfaces, which are exploited by the trading networks that drive globalization from the bottom up. The borders of Africa have become Africa’s borders, agreed as such and strengthened by a process of border reaffirmation supported by the African Union. The origin of the continent’s internal tensions lies elsewhere, the key issue being appropriation and control of the periphery and the external frontiers.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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