The COVID-19 Impact and Culture Nexus in Japan: Insights for the Global Community
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This opinion column identifies and reflects on the defining moments in Japan's sprint toward acquiring herd immunity by the end of 2021. As of this writing, COVID-19 conversations across the globe are becoming less and less concerning, as wealthy nations ramp up testing and triple-vaccinate their citizens, as COVID-19-related infection and hospitalization rates fall significantly, or, as is the case of the less developed countries of the Global South, concerted efforts are being made to have a sizable number of residents tested for COVID-19 and inoculated with their first shot. In developed economies, the pendulum of healthcare uneasiness is pivoting toward a simple issue—endemicity—as governments ease or phase out COVID-19 restrictions, as the disease is increasingly being viewed through the lens of, say, the seasonal flu, and as agitation against COVID-19 mandates leads to protests in countries such as the Netherlands, France and Canada. The world will get by, the argument goes, by coexisting with COVID-19 as it does with a host of other diseases, including the seasonal influenza, dengue, and malaria. But applying such a view now to the pandemic may be inadvisable, as Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director general of the World Health Organization, asserts: “We're concerned that a narrative has taken hold in some countries that because of vaccines, and because of Omicron's high transmissibility and lower severity, preventing transmission is no longer possible and no longer necessary. Nothing could be further from the truth. More transmission means more disease.” But the world need not have been so ravaged by the pandemic only if it had looked around to remind itself about commonsensical steps that could have been considered in response.
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 | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| 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".