Full Circle: More than Just Social Implications of GIS
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 emergence of geographic information systems (GIS) has raised a useful debate in the discipline of geography over the connection between technology and society. Proponents of GIS have argued from the beginning that their work had a value that warranted adoption; hence, that technology brought something to society. A wave of criticism argued that there were implications and risks to society in adopting these technologies. While this debate served some useful purposes, it was only a start on the issue. The focus on implications risked the simplification of seeing GIS as an inexorable, implacable force, a form of “technological determinism.” This paper argues for a full circle of implication: GIS – the daily practice, the data stored, the software – is constructed and maintained by social processes embedded in historical and geographically contingent settings. The full circle requires an openness to studies of the influence from the social realm to the technology. By tracing the full circle, too, we can better appreciate the implications to society.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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