Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2007, an apology was made by the nation of Ghana to descendants of trans-Atlantic slaves. Along with this apology came the Joseph Project—Ghana’s attempt to reconcile and provide reparations to the slave babies to evoke Hartman (2008) . Ghana attempted to evoke its own “Josephs” to embark on a journey of reconciliation and (re) connection. The Ghanaian state articulated this project in terms of the responsibility of the diaspora to its African brothers and sisters as well as to the “homeland,” calling upon the notion of Sankɔfa, which emphasizes a wisdom in the concept of return. Ghana made several calls to the diaspora to return, invest and support their brothers and sisters. Such collective apologies have necessarily proven to be phenomena of the 20th–21st centuries, yet Ghana’s 2007 apology and the Joseph Project are riddled with contradictions. Not only do they conceal the historical relations which allowed the trans-Atlantic slave trade to flourish but it also appropriates the radicalness of the Pan-African movement to ensure “investments” and, by doing so, distorts Sankɔfa.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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".