MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3088246073 · doi:10.1177/0964663920960536

The Travels of a Set of Numbers: The Multiple Networks Enabled by the Colombian ‘Estrato’ System

2020· article· en· W3088246073 on OpenAlexaff
Fernando León Tamayo Arboleda, Mariana Valverde

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial & Legal Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIncome, Poverty, and Inequality
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolidaritySubsidyZoningPaymentCore (optical fiber)Class (philosophy)Work (physics)Differential (mechanical device)SociologyLawEconomicsMathematical economicsComputer sciencePolitical scienceTelecommunicationsPoliticsArtificial intelligenceFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article documents how a Constitutionally grounded effort to institute ‘cross subsidies’ for public utility payments gave rise to a set of numbers that never achieved the goal of cross-class solidarity. This legal based system lived on, in large part because the numbers were quickly adopted both in popular speech and by multiple institutions, in an uncoordinated manner. Scalar tensions are key to the story: the Colombian ‘estrato’ system for classifying residential properties (initially for differential utility payment purposes) has at its core a set of numbers that was designed as nationally valid: but the work of labelling all residences with one of the six numbers to produce zoning-like ‘estrato’ maps incites qualitative micro-local knowledge. Overall, we show that local knowledges of socioeconomic difference constantly clash with and undermine not only the initial ambitious plan to render cross-class ‘solidarity’ technical but also the subsequent efforts to propose more rational alternatives.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.295
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial & Legal StudiesSame topicIncome, Poverty, and InequalityFrench-language works237,207