Bibliographic record
Abstract
Given the axiom that social reality consists of individuals and their interactions, and the conjecture that the interesting way individuals interact is through choice, this paper explicates three postulates in four stages: 1) choices are made up of ‘entrained’ sub-choices: thoughts and acts that must be made for the pursuit of another goal; 2) a sub-choice ‘entrained’ in all other choices is a choice for ‘predictability’: a quasi-Bayesian assessment whereby the greater an option’s predictability, the more likely it is to be chosen; 3) it is axiomatic that decisions should always be informed by as many truths and as few falsehoods as possible; true ‘is’ statements can only result in more fulfilling ‘ought’ statements; 4) 1 and 2, and their implications, constitute ‘is’s of sociodynamics, generating a moral and ethical ‘ought’ which I will call ‘Political Existentialism’, a stance that should inform ways in which we organize and run our societies to allow the pursuit of Eudaimonia . Both concepts point to a sociological ‘constant’: if every choice entrains predictability and predictability is a measurable variable, then each choice can be related to every other choice in a measurable way; because choice is the way in which individuals consciously interact with their environments and one another, predictability can be used as a ‘common ground’ to measure and compare cases of choice-based sociodynamics.
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 | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".