MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029889595 · doi:10.1080/0739314022000025390

The Everyday Spaces of Global Politics: Work, Leisure, Family

2002· article· en· W2029889595 on OpenAlexaff
Matt Davies, Michael Niemann

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Political Science · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRealmPoliticsSociologyAlienationInternational relationsEveryday lifeField (mathematics)Global politicsSocial relationWork (physics)Social scienceEpistemologyPolitical economyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Despite many innovative contributions to international relations theory over the past two decades, a “common sense” view of global politics continues to persist both in the field and in the arenas of public policy and opinion. This article investigates the origins of this persistence and offers an alternative framework for the analysis of global politics that considers international relations as social relations produced by a broad array of actors in multiple spheres. Drawing on the work of Henri Lefebvre, the article investigates the role of alienation in everyday life and the resulting mystifications of the realities of global politics and goes on to consider the social spaces of work, leisure and the family as important arenas where these mystifications can be overcome and international relations be reclaimed from the realm of experts and statesmen.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.032
Scholarly communication0.0090.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations64
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew Political ScienceSame topicLabor Movements and UnionsFrench-language works237,207