Bibliographic record
Abstract
Poverty is worldwide, but empirical studies of poverty, income distribution, and low-income aid programs for citizens have thus far been more common in America, Canada, Australia, and the major industrial nations of Europe.American and Canadian studies of poverty, income issues, and social welfare programs have, to an extent, been insular in scope.Poverty & Public Policy (PPP) is a global journal.In much of the world, including Central and South America, Africa, the Middle East, and much of Asia, there are important studies of poverty, income, and aid programs; little has been integrated into the scholarly literature, however, which is an oversight this journal aims to correct.Poverty & Public Policy publishes quality research on poverty, income distribution, and welfare programs from scholars around the globe.PPP is eclectic, publishing peer-reviewed empirical studies, peer-reviewed theoretical essays on approaches to poverty and social welfare, book reviews, data sets, edited blogs, and incipient data from scholars, aid workers, and other hands-on offi cials in less developed nations and nations that are just beginning to focus on these problems in a scientifi c fashion.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.091 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".