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
In North America, the classic voice of colonial peoples' connectedness to nature and a wellspring of distinct new identity has been the romantic individualist writing of affinity for wilderness. The truth is, however, that wilderness account makes North Americans, Australians, and New Zealanders culturally blind to an emerging split between wilderness as a land management concept and the state of the wild characteristic of the lands near the cities where 80 percent of us now live. To say land is wilderness, one has to imagine a static systemic context creating conditions that, if it were not for the colonizing project of land conversion, population implantation, mineral exploitation, the land would forever reflect. What about land that runs away from past colonial domestications? What about land that has hybridized with colonial escapee species? Thoroughly worked over lands are fallow on the edges of cities, and new kinds of wilds are emerging upon them. Let me propose that the time is ripe for the sibling of wilderness and for cultural forms exploring and reflecting its stories, for how can you preserve what you cannot name or the culture has never helped you to categorize?
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 | 0.001 |
| 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