MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1863278106 · doi:10.1002/wat2.1009

Modern water and its discontents: a history of hydrosocial renewal

2013· article· en· W1863278106 on OpenAlexaff
Jamie Linton

Bibliographic record

VenueWiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Water · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWater Governance and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResocializationContext (archaeology)Corporate governanceFace (sociological concept)Integrated water resources managementEnvironmental ethicsWater scarcityBusinessPolitical scienceWater resourcesSociologyGeographyEcologySocial scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Water planning and management in the 20th century were characterized by a particular way of understanding and relating to water that may be described in terms of ‘modern water’. Essentially, modern water is a way of knowing, accounting for, and representing water apart from its social context. Modern water replaced a wealth of different waters whose essence was defined by the social circumstances in which they occurred, rather than by the compound of oxygen and hydrogen to which all waters may be reduced. This paper traces the history of modern water and describes its current retreat in the face of circumstances that call for the resocialization of waters. Several examples of this resocialization are given, including a new way of representing hydrosocial relations known as the ‘hydrosocial cycle’, the campaign for the human right to water and emerging practices in water engineering and water management. WIREs Water 2014, 1:111–120. doi: 10.1002/wat2.1009 This article is categorized under: Human Water > Rights to Water Human Water > Water Governance Human Water > Water as Imagined and Represented

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.063
Scholarly communication0.0050.008
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations191
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWiley Interdisciplinary Reviews WaterSame topicWater Governance and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207