MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025703718 · doi:10.1068/d4908

Cohabitating in the Globalised World: Peter Sloterdijk's Global Foams and Bruno Latour's Cosmopolitics

2009· article· en· W2025703718 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Planning D Society and Space · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiterature and Cultural Memory
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAction (physics)MetaphorEpistemologyContext (archaeology)ConstructivePoliticsOntologySociologyGlobalizationTrilogyPolitical actionPolitical philosophySpace (punctuation)Critical theoryPhilosophyPolitical scienceLawArt historyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper seeks to present a comprehensive and systematic picture of Peter Sloterdijk's ambitious and provocative theory of globalisation. In the Sphären (Spheres) trilogy, Sloterdijk provides both a spatialised ontology of human existence and a historical thesis concerning the radical shifts in human conceptions of the space or sphere they inhabit. Essentially, Sloterdijk argues that global interconnectedness and increasing population and communication density have brought about a situation in which every human action is limited and inhibited by the proximity of others—a situation he describes using the metaphor of foam. In this context, are not all possibilities for constructive political action stifled from the very outset? I will argue that Bruno Latour's concept of cosmopolitics furnishes us with resources to respond to this collapse of political space.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.566
Threshold uncertainty score0.374

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.208 · 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