Bibliographic record
Abstract
An ancient Arab proverb proclaims that men resemble their times more than they do their fathers. The age-old notion that social change is embedded in value shifts from one generation to another has become something of a truism over time. Phrases like "my generation," "the younger generation" and the "post-war generation" have crept into common vernacular as a means of demarcating signifi cant social groups on the basis of their locations in history. Yet our recent interest in diff erences among the generations is not mere fad or pop-culture frivolity. The construct of generations has a long theoretical tradition in the fi eld of sociology. The theory of generations is largely predicated on the foundational work of sociologist Karl Mannheim, whose 1923 essay "The problem of generations" posited that individuals born within the same historical period and socio-cultural context experience the same events and context during their crucial formative years, which provides them with a common "inborn way of experiencing life and the world" In other words, history imbues each generation with a unique worldview, which is forged by the historical opportunities and challenges of our times. Subsequent researchers and theorists have elaborated on this theory, noting that the shaping infl uences of a generation must be understood as the confl uence of historical events, progression through the developmental life cycle and episodic period eff ects that impact on society as a whole Others have depicted the generational phenomenon as a battle for resources, with younger and older generations fi ghting to serve their own specifi c interests Thus, we can view a generation as the product of its historical context, experienced over the course of its biological life cycle, aff ected by periodic events that aff ect the opportunities and challenges it faces.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".