MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041330643 · doi:10.1177/0967010608096148

Sovereign Power and the Biopolitics of Human Security

2008· article· en· W2041330643 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

VenueSecurity Dialogue · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Security and Public Health
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiopowerHuman securitySovereigntyPower (physics)SociologySecurity studiesDual (grammatical number)Critical security studiesPolitical sciencePolitical economyLawPoliticsSocial scienceNetwork security policyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article examines the manner in which the human security discourse enables a dual exercise of sovereign power and biopower. Drawing from the work of Michel Foucault and Giorgio Agamben, it argues that human security contributes to this dual exercise by conceptualizing a form of life rendered amenable to biopolitical technologies and rationalities while simultaneously defining the conditions of exceptionality that assist in sovereign power's ability to authorize international interventions meant to secure human life. This frame of reference is then mobilized to read the human security discourse within the broader developments of the concept of security from the immediate postwar period to the post-9/11 moment. It is argued that the human security discourse informs the current biopolitical networks of world order and often works in conjunction with — rather than against — the global exercise of sovereign power made evident by the 'war on terror'.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.239
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.275 · 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