Imagination, hospitality, and affection: The unique legacy of food insects?
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.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it