ANNOTATED OUTLINE – SOCIAL CAPITAL
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. The capital approach is an economic theory used to help measure and understand important features of the human environment. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), “Capital in economics is something produced in one time period to be used in the production of other goods and income during future time periods ” (ABS, 2004, p.109). The four primary forms of capital currently are natural, economic, human and social. Of these, the most controversial is social capital. 2. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation Development (OECD) defined social capital as the “ … resources gained through social ties, memberships of networks and sharing of norms” (Cotes and Healy, 2001, p. 23). This definition has since been adopted by several national statistical organisations, including the ABS and Statistics Canada. It implies that social capital exists to provide access to the resources of other capital forms. 3. In 2007, Czesany highlighted the importance of social connections when he defined social capital as the “Networks together with shared norms, values and understandings that facilitate co-operation within or among groups. ” This conceptualisation reflects recent acknowledgement that social capital is itself a unique and valuable source of well-being.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".