Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social contract theories from John Locke to John Rawls are rooted in a flawed ontological foundation as autonomous, self-interested individuals with interests/rights abstracted from any relationship to each other, land/animals they live on/amongst or even time/history live within a state of nature or original position. Political authority and/or fundamental principles of justice are produced as inorganic artifices, constituted via the aggregate consent of natural/pre-political beings. While citizenship may appear universal, in reality, ‘freemen’ were defined along gendered, racialized, class-based, and/or ableist lines. Thus, a hierarchically defined subset of people consents to authority or the principles of justice. In contrast, an organic theory of citizenship is rooted in the opposite ontological premise with human beings understood to be living, growing interdependent beings born into relationships and ecosystems that pre-exist and upon which they depend to live at all, are explicitly anti-hierarchical. Relations between people, society, and the ecosystem must be theorized as a priority rather than bracketed outside of consideration and/or constituted as the byproduct of consent. The central question for an organic theory of citizenship is thus: how to create a healthy ecosystem and non-hierarchical set of relations so humans from birth to old age, creatures, and the earth itself are all able to flourish interdependently?
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.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it