MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125579695 · doi:10.1177/1206331209360865

“Upside Down Decolonization” in Subnational Island Jurisdictions: Questioning the “Post” in Postcolonialism

2010· article· en· W2125579695 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

VenueSpace and Culture · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIsland Studies and Pacific Affairs
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDecolonizationRhetoricSovereigntyColonialismPostcolonialism (international relations)Independence (probability theory)Metropolitan areaPolitical sciencePolitical economySociologyGeographyLawLinguisticsPoliticsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most subnational (and mainly island) jurisdictions around the world today are actively conspiring in the dogged pursuit of protracted and extended colonial relationships—what is referred to as “upside down decolonization”—rather than aspiring to full independence. Various metropolitan powers are also discovering that island territories can be excised and rejigged as jurisdictional enclaves, able to perform (and get away with) exceptional functions. These can range from detention centers to low-tax regimes, from military bases to exclusive processing zones. In spite of the lingering rhetoric about the virtues of sovereignty, these “infinite pauses” in decolonization call for a more adequate conceptual assimilation within postcolonial theory.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.686
Threshold uncertainty score0.551

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.256 · 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