MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7021109186

Neoconservatism in the United States and the institutionalized exclusion of Poor Women

2007· article· en· W7021109186 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLusophone University Repository · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies in Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of OxfordYork UniversityUniversity of MinnesotaUniversity of PennsylvaniaU.S. Department of Justice
KeywordsPovertySocial exclusionMoralityFreedom of choiceEconomic freedomPublic assistance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Public Assistance to the poor in the United States was always been reluctant and especially cruel to women. A society that from the outset prized Kantian principles of individual freedom over Rousseau’s notions of social contract and that was dominated by a puritanical morality saw poverty as self-made. If individuals had freedom of choice, bad outcomes were necessarily caused by bad choices. The poor had themselves to blame.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.116

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.011
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.176 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLusophone University Repository→Same topicHistorical Studies in Science→French-language works237,207→