Imagination, hospitality, and affection: The unique legacy of food insects?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Current global solutions to food security threaten cultural and biological diversity; the most effective “global” solutions may in fact be specific, varied, and local. Food insects, in particular, provide a rich window through which to understand the human condition in ways that help us deal effectively and sustainably with the “wicked problem” of food security. Insects have long been human food in many cultural and ecological contexts. What the Western world can contribute is not so much the commodification and global-scale production of food insects as the empowerment of those for whom insects are a sustainable local food source to maintain their knowledge and continue to utilize them. Western negativity around insects and other invertebrates has pervasive effects on global food policy and practice and presents a significant psychological barrier to the success of conversations on sustainable food security. To overcome this negative barrier, we need to cultivate a new imagination, practice and accept true hospitality, and develop a deep respect and affection for culturally diverse foodways.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".