MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2883759876 · doi:10.1525/irqr.2018.11.2.178

<i>Avatar</i> , Tar Sands, and Dad

2018· article· en· W2883759876 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Review of Qualitative Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographies of human-animal interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUniversity of Massachusetts Dartmouth
KeywordsAvatarNovellaEthnographyConversationBiographyNarrativeArtIndigenousLiteratureHistoryVisual artsArt historySociologyArchaeologyCommunicationEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is an (auto)ethnographic performance inspired by a conversation with my father while leaving the theater after watching Avatar back in 2009. It is intended to be performed as readers’ theater. In it, I examine the role anthropology plays in the performance of imperialist nostalgia across the stories of James Cameron's film Avatar, Ursula K. Le Guin's novella The Word for World Is Forest, and Theodora Kroeber's Ishi in Two Worlds: A Biography of the Last Wild Indian in North America. I see a performance of alternative possibilities in Le Guin's utopian speculative fiction and in recent Indigenous-led activism opposing megaresource extraction projects such as Alberta's tar sands and the pipelines that snake out from it.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.816
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.375
GPT teacher head0.651
Teacher spread0.275 · 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