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
One of the ways that environmental inequalities manifest is through the market economy. Research increasingly shows how the weight of capitalist interests cause disequilibria in nature: these imbalances spread to the welfare of animals and back to humans through socio-economic interactions. One Health recognises this connection as generative of unhealthy environments, but little has so far been said about the morality of balancing conflicting interests between animals and humans for resources and space. This paper focusses on One Health’s interdisciplinarity; and provides an alternative research methodology, based on concordance of the “right to science,” to analyse ethical collaborations between markets and ecological economies. The argument is illustrated by the financing of space exploration and its cost to the environment. My modest ambition is to enhance the ethical debate of a planetary “eco-” [Greek: oikos “house, dwelling place, habitation”] by connecting health, economies [oikonomia “household management”], and ecology [logia “study of”] to a sense of normative environmentalism.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it