Bibliographic record
Abstract
Steven Horwitz of St. Lawrence University reviews “F. A. Hayek and the Modern Economy: Economic Organization and Activity”, by Sandra J. Peart and David M. Levy. The Econlit abstract of this book begins: “Ten papers, resulting from the ""Hayek and the Modern World" conference held at the University of Richmond in April 2013, explore the role of human agency in Friedrich Hayek's thought and consider his writings as they relate to economic organization and activity, particularly to assess what role he assigns to leaders in determining economic progress. Papers discuss Hayek's unsentimental liberalism (Peter McNamara); Hayek and the ""individualists" (Sandra J. Peart and David M. Levy); the evolution, evaluation, and reform of social morality--a Hayekian analysis (Gerald Gaus); Hayek and the conditions of freedom (Kenneth Minogue); Hayek and the early foundations of spontaneous order (Emily Skarbek); Hayek and the nomothetes (Christopher S. Martin); the control of engagement order--Clement Attlee's road to serfdom? (Ekkehard A. Köhler and Stefan Koler); Hayekian perspectives on Canada's economic and social reforms of the 1990s (Jason Clemens and Niels Veldhuis); the conjoint quest for a liberal positive program--""Old Chicago," Freiburg, and Hayek (Andrew Farrant and Nicola Tynan); and Hayek and Václav Klaus's life (Klaus). Peart is Dean of the Jepson School of Leadership Studies at the University of Richmond. Levy is Professor of Economics at George Mason University and Distinguished Fellow of the History of Economics Society.”
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".