MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1605025184 · doi:10.1080/13698010903553385

SHIFTING THE GROUND BENEATH US

2010· article· en· W1605025184 on OpenAlexaff
D. Alissa Trotz

Bibliographic record

VenueInterventions · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCaribbean history, culture, and politics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCONTESTGrassrootsPraxisGender studiesStatus quoPoliticsNarrativePopulationSociologyLivelihoodPolitical scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nearly three decades after the implementation of structural adjustment programmes, there are rapidly growing social and economic inequalities in the Caribbean, a situation further aggravated in Guyana by a divided and highly racialized political landscape. This essay looks at how Red Thread, a Guyanese women's organization, draws on women's caring work to ground various interventions that contest the status quo and span traditional racialized and spatialized divisions in the country. Beginning with an account of feminist rearticulations of social reproduction as critical feminist praxis, the essay grounds this conceptual frame in a discussion of the January 2005 floods that devastated Guyana's coastal communities and affected some 40 per cent of the population. It focuses specifically on how Red Thread organized with grassroots women to challenge official narratives of the floods, to make women's work visible and to come up with a list of demands that brought women together across several communities. It concludes with a discussion of the effects of the mobilization, and how it demonstrates a commitment to engaging women as a diverse collectivity through working out rather than assuming a politics of connection and affiliation.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0250.044
Scholarly communication0.0120.007
Open science0.0010.014
Research integrity0.0050.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.002

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.311 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations21
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInterventionsSame topicCaribbean history, culture, and politicsFrench-language works237,207