Bibliographic record
Abstract
The impetus behind this Special Issue emerged from a quest to move beyondbinary thinking in the contemporary period about people who sell sexual services,including recent disputes about “sex trafficking vs. prostitution” and“criminalization vs. decriminalization”, to encourage theoretical and empiricalscholarship by exploring how sex work actually operates under different regulatoryregimes. The volume includes contributions from scholars of different socialsciences backgrounds based in five countries– New Zealand, the United Kingdom,Brazil, the United States and Canada. The article topics range widely,and both quantitative and qualitative research methods are showcased. The empiricalevidence presented adds to our current understanding of the complexityof this phenomenon of sex commerce/prostitution, which is found to be largelya problem of social inequality within and across capitalist societies. The authorscall for policies to address occupational and societal wide inequities faced by sexworkers across many countries.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.033 | 0.026 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.663 | 0.012 |
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".