Space Matters: The 2010 Winter Olympics and ITS Discontents
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The history of the Olympic Games is fraught with racism, class privilege, and questionable leadership from the International Olympic Committee (IOC). In the modern era, the Olympics have generated an increasing scale of dissent. Activists challenging the 2010 Winter Olympics in Vancouver adopted concertedly spatial strategies and tactics. Organizing around three main issues—indigenous rights, economic concerns, and civil liberties—they linked in solidarity with civil libertarians, human rights workers, and bystander publics. This article analyzes these activist actions through the lens of geographical theory, examining how the production of space, scale bending, and the calculated construction of discursive space helped anti-Olympics activists build camaraderie and foment a meaningful challenge to the Games that resonated with the general public. Activists in Vancouver were effective, and before the Olympics dock in London for the 2012 Summer Games, it makes sense to pause and reconsider their methods of dissident citizenship.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it