Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the modern industrialized and urbanized world, the problem of 'which language user shall have the best opportunity to get which job' has become a key issue in some ethnic conflicts. Language of work, especially of those desirable jobs for which two or more groups compete, greatly influences life-chances of the members of the group. It is because, in an industrial and indsutrializing society, language can be a very strong barrier which blocks the social mobility or advancement of social groups. The present paper is an attempt at the clarification of the causal relationships between the language of work and group conflict for its control. First, a very simple model consisting of a few variables is proposed. Then, through case studies of Slovakia and Bohemia in the late 19th century, Quebec, Kosovo, and Sri Lanka after the Second World War, it is suggested that the incidence and extent of a Ianguage conflict around the lanaguge of work primarily depends upon two factors : the extent of group expectation for disirable job and the amount of supply of such job in which a given language is in normal use.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.035 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".