Truth, Lies, and Audio Files: A Conflict Across Reputational and Convivial Domains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conviviality (convivencia), a rubric for peaceable coexistence across cultural and ethnoracial differences, has been promoted as a multifaceted educational priority in contemporary Spain, although the stakes of tolerance and civility mean quite different things for pupils of autochthonous and immigrant backgrounds. For some Moroccan youth attending school in the agricultural southeast, experiences with xenophobia and racialized exclusion have made them both fierce critics and defenders of convivial precepts. At one secondary school, questions about convivial protocols became especially pressing in the wake of accusations against several Moroccan girls for stealing sandwiches from a disabled peer. A confrontation between three of them was captured on a digital audio recorder and, in tandem with interview and observational data, suggested that convivial priorities had been pushed aside in favour of reputational attacks and disciplinary punishments. The juxtaposition of convivial ideals against reputational dynamics shows that competing logics of communicative entitlement undergirded the conflict. And in the girls’ various attempts to absolve themselves, imputations about moral character and social affiliations pointed to the need for fuller consideration of conviviality as a relational concept.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".