MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3090448125 · doi:10.29173/irie41

Cultural Diversity and Globalisation: An Intercultural Hermeneutical (Afri-can) Perspective

2007· article· en· W3090448125 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chibueze Udeani

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Review of Information Ethics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican history and culture analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiversity (politics)Cultural diversityGlobalizationPhenomenonPerspective (graphical)PoliticsSociologyOrder (exchange)Environmental ethicsEpistemologyPolitical scienceSocial scienceAnthropologyLawPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In our today‘s global age one of the central challenges facing Africa is that of coming to terms positively with her cultural diversity. Furthermore Africa is confronted with the challenge of global cultural diversity that has been characteristic of our global age. One of the questions raised here is how can the intrinsic African cultural diversity be made comprehensible not only to non-Africans but also to Africans themselves? Talking of under-standing makes the issue a hermeneutical one. Hence the following questions, how can this hermeneutical challenge be mastered? What tools are required in order to accomplish this mission? Any efforts towards accomplishing this task must have to put many dimensions into consideration. These include, among other things, the historical, regional, political, economic, etc. Such efforts would imply not only Africa being occupied with herself culturally, she on the other side needs to become relevantly conscious of the implications of these cultural dynamisms, understand it with reference to herself and the rest of the global community and finally interpret this phenomenon from an African perspective. These are the issues being addressed in this paper.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.835
Threshold uncertainty score0.715

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.320 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations7
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Review of Information EthicsSame topicAfrican history and culture analysisFrench-language works237,207