Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Domicide, the intentional destruction of home, is a concept first conceived by Canadian geographers Porteous and Smith in 2001. In the current global sociopolitical landscape, domicide and its impact is writ large, present in both the Global North and South, and spanning a variety of scales, from mass displacement through the Syrian civil war to controversial UK housing policy. However, it has been under‐represented in critical geographies of home literature. This paper calls for a resurrection and recasting of the term, highlighting the multitude of contexts in which rethinking domicide provides an important contribution towards the expansion of critical geographies of home scholarship. The paper focuses on four areas of geography in which scholars have begun to explore and extend the term: emerging literature concerning home un making; socio‐symbolic domicide in the geopolitical context; domicide and heteronormativity in post‐disaster home loss; and agency and resistance to domicide through both political activism and banal resistances of the everyday. In sum, this fourfold exploration highlights both the current and potential contributions of domicide towards expanding critical geographies of home.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.137 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.025 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".