MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2573971008 · doi:10.1177/2043820615607762

Hope of deliverance

2015· article· en· W2573971008 on OpenAlex
Anne-Marie D’Aoust

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

VenueDialogues in Human Geography · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Security and Public Health
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProblematizationPublicsGovernmentalitySociologySecuritizationOpenness to experienceLegitimacyRelation (database)Resilience (materials science)PoliticsTransparency (behavior)Political scienceEpistemologyLaw and economicsPolitical economyLawEconomicsSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In his article, Barnett makes a convincing case for the need to consider securitization as a mode of problematization. When it comes to security, he enjoins us to consider the role of publics and publicness without necessarily committing to an unreflexive liberal ideal of transparency, non-interference and openness. This response focuses on two central issues that emerge when we pay attention to publics, security and the spaces of their unfolding. The first one entails a reflection on the different understandings of the political and the legitimacy conferred to the different publics attached to them. The second one is the need to deepen our understanding of subjecthood in relation to security and resilience. Acknowledging and better accounting for the great variation in different subjects’ capacity to enact resilience or internalize security norms cast doubts on some security studies’ and resilience studies’ bleak assessment of governmentality and its workings.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.571
Threshold uncertainty score0.964

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.277 · 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