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
We often think of care as personal or intimate, and citzenship as political and public. In Carefair , Paul Kershaw urges us to resist this private/public distinction, and makes a convincing case for treating caregiving as a matter of citizenship that obliges and empowers everyone in society. Carefair has its roots in the rise of “duty” discourses - in neoliberalism, communitarianism, the thrid way, social conservatism, and feminism - that advocate renewed appreciation for obligations in civil society. The convergence of these discourses, Kershaw argues, signals the possibility for political compromise in favour of policies that will deter men from free-riding on female care. The author invites readers to rethink the role of care duties and entitlements in their daily lives, in public policy, and in debates about social inclusion. He provides a detailed blueprint for more public investment in work-family balance, and recommends amendments to Canadian parental leave, child care, and employment standards that would collectively form a caregiving framework analogous to workfare.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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