MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2940501455

The Geo-Politics of the Anthropocene: Using Stratigraphy to Naturalize the Anthropocene as a Formal Geological Unit

2019· article· en· W2940501455 on OpenAlexaff
Jeni Barton

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Macrodynamic Analysis (Memorial University of Newfoundland) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy and Sustainability Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnthropoceneEnvironmental ethicsHistory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

negative effects; embrace and expand the human potential to better manage and control the planet).3 A common thread running through the many disparate Anthropocene stories is the very general point that at least some human activities have effects on the planet that are both large-scale and deleterious.The list of offending human activities is probably familiar: greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel burning, altering of land-cover, fertilizer runoff, overfishing, garbage production, natural resource extraction, to name just a few.The undesirable effects include climate change, ocean acidification, sea level rise, lack of potable water, eutrophication, acid rain, ozone depletion, biodiversity loss, the Great Pacific garbage patch, and rivers that catch on fire.But the Anthropocene concept is not limited to the humanities.Its reach crosses the boundary of the so-called two cultures.Many in the sciences have also adopted the concept even if only tentatively.And its modern origins 4 are typically traced to an article published in 2000 in the International Geosphere Biosphere Program Newsletter by Paul Crutzen and Eugene Stoermer, an atmospheric chemist and biologist respectively.Crutzen and Stoermer argued that, due to the many effects of human activity observable around the planet, we have entered a new "geological epoch" dominated by humans.5 Sometimes the beginnings of the Anthropocene are traced to Crutzen's 2002 concepts piece in Nature titled "Geology of Mankind," where Crutzen again argued that the Holocene (the current geological epoch) had ended and we were now living in the Anthropocene, the "human-dominated" geological epoch.6 Though not geologists themselves, Crutzen and Stoermer used geological nomenclature to propose a new span of geological time.But for geologists, as we shall see, a new span of geological time corresponds 3 Bonneuil and Fressoz, 65-96.4 There have been some precursors to the term "Anthropocene."It should be distinguished from the term "Anthropogene," which was another, informal, name for the Quaternary Period (the current geological period), but has fallen out of use.See, Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy, International Commission on Stratigraphy, "Anthropocene," accessed 18 April 2017, https://quaternary.stratigraphy.org/

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.029
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.249 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Macrodynamic Analysis (Memorial University of Newfoundland)→Same topicGlobal Energy and Sustainability Research→French-language works237,207→