MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W658891519 · doi:10.2307/j.ctt9qgrw6

Contemporary social evils

2009· book· en· W658891519 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueBristol University Press eBooks · 2009
Typebook
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing, Finance, and Neoliberalism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Foreword Nicholas Timmins Introduction Julia Unwin 'Social evils' and 'social problems' in Britain since 1904 Josie Harris Section 1: Public voices Uneasy and powerless: findings from the online consultation Beth Watts and David Utting Truncated opportunities: eliciting unheard voices on social evils Alice Mowlam and Chris Creegan Living with social evils: further views from people in disadvantaged groups Chris Creegan, Martha Warrener and Rachel Kinsella Section 2: Viewpoints Preface David Utting A decline of values Has there been a decline in values in British society? Anthony Browne Social evils and social good A.C. Grayling Unkind, risk averse and untrusting: if this is today's society, can we change it? Baroness Julia Neuberger Distrust What and who is it we don't trust? Shaun Bailey Fear and distrust in 21st century Britain Anna Minton The absence of society The absence of society Zygmunt Bauman Individualism A wrong turn in the search for freedom? Neal Lawson Individualism and community: investing in civil society Stephen Thake Inequality Opportunity and aspiration: two sides of the same coin? Chris Creegan Five types of inequality Ferdinand Mount The poor and the unequal Jeremy Seabrook Section 3: Reflections Reflections on social evils and human nature Matthew Taylor Afterword David Utting

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.317

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.008
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0950.018

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.146 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBristol University Press eBooksSame topicHousing, Finance, and NeoliberalismFrench-language works237,207