MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2409520831

Atmospheres: Aesthetics of emotional spaces [Book Review]

2016· article· en· W2409520831 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peta Mitchell

Bibliographic record

VenueQUT ePrints (Queensland University of Technology) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIsland Studies and Pacific Affairs
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAotearoaScholarshipIndigenousEthnographyHistoryColonialismAestheticsSociologyArtAnthropologyGender studiesArchaeologyLawPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

More problematic than his avoidance of recent geographic scholarship is his treatment of indigenous, ethnographic and postcolonial perspectives on island life. Not only is much of this scholarship absent, the bits that are there are mostly derided. He slams Kamau Braithwaite and his concept of ‘tidalectics’ as ‘unpackable’ (p. 20) and also claims that Greg Dening’s approach to islands as having ‘permeable cultural boundaries’ has ‘intellectual costs’ (p. 23). In a section of the book on ‘Naming and Sovereignty’, instead of an in-depth examination of the processes of decoding and recoding that goes on in indigenous island landscapes under colonialism (as could be discussed at length if Shell chose to examine Aotearoa, Hawaii, or hundreds of other places) we are instead presented a vignette about his childhood street fights with other kids over the naming of a hometown island in Canada, as well as ruminations about what Herman Melville and Ellen Semple thought of islands in the nineteenth century. In short, if you want to know what dead Caucasians like Shakespeare, Melville, Kant, Mackinder, More, and ancient Athenians thought about islands, then this book is a good resource. If, however, you are looking for information about what islands are like today – and what they mean to the people who live on and interact with them – then you will have to look elsewhere.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.004

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQUT ePrints (Queensland University of Technology)Same topicIsland Studies and Pacific AffairsFrench-language works237,207