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
This paper proposes a new account of libertarian rectification. Those claiming property rights that limit the liberty of others must contribute to the correction of inequalities caused by past violations of libertarian rights. The function of this principle is not to identify the responsibilities of those with legitimate holdings, but to explain how there can be holdings that are legitimate no matter how unequal when holdings did not arise in accordance with the ideal historical process. Patterning is part of the principle, rather than a second-stage approximation given historical uncertainty. The principle targets inequalities generated by violations of libertarian rights, but involves no commitment to equality in other dimensions, nor to maintaining equality in face of people’s permissible choices about how to use their holdings. The paper revises Rothbard’s suggestion that when restitution of property to its rightful owner is not possible, the holding reverts to the commons and so becomes available for appropriation. The paper restores the Lockean proviso on appropriation, in this account, and argues that the historical shadow of the proviso should be more demanding in the context of inequality caused by injustice than it is in the context of innocent environmental and social change.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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