Classification
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".
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
Abstract Poor-led social movements seek to transform the structures that exclude, subordinate, and exploit people who live in poverty. The people in these movements know that durable poverty reduction ultimately depends upon the social and political empowerment of the poor. Yet despite the paradigm-shifting contributions of poor activists, their insights and visions of poverty eradication have been largely neglected in philosophical responses to poverty, which focus instead on the obligations of individuals and institutions in affluent states. The erasure of people living in poverty as central agents of justice puts normative theorists out of step with progressive, pro-poor approaches to poverty reduction and development, and with research on the important role of grassroots social movements in these processes. From rural landless workers in Brazil, to urban shack dwellers in South Africa, to unemployed workers impoverished by neoliberal economic policies in Argentina, poor-led organizations and movements advance a more political understanding of poverty—and of what is needed to eradicate it. Addressed primarily to political theorists and philosophers, this book shows how these groups develop the political consciousness and collective capabilities of poor communities, and help to create the basis for solidaristic action among poor populations. Defending the idea of a political responsibility for solidarity, Deveaux shows how nonpoor outsiders can help to advance a transformative anti-poverty agenda by supporting the efforts of poor-led social movements.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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