MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2976923263 · doi:10.1177/2399654419875148

Geontographies: On Elizabeth Povinelli’s <i>Geontologies: A Requiem for Late Liberalism</i>

2019· article· en· W2976923263 on OpenAlexaff
Elizabeth Johnson, Garnet Kindervater, Zoe Todd, Kathryn Yusoff, Keith Woodward, Elizabeth A. Povinelli

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Planning C Politics and Space · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographies of human-animal interactions
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLiberalismBiopowerSociologyPower (physics)ColonialismPoliticsMaterialismPolitical philosophyIndigenousEnvironmental ethicsAnthropologySocial sciencePolitical scienceEpistemologyLawPhilosophyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This forum brings together perspectives from geography, philosophy, and political science to reflect on Elizabeth Povinelli’s, 2016 book, Geontologies: A Requiem for Late Liberalism. Contributions come from both junior and senior scholars across a range of interests and backgrounds. Elizabeth Povinelli’s Geontologies is the fourth in her series on Dwelling in Late Liberalism that began in 1994 with Labor’s Lot: The Power, History and Culture of Aboriginal Action. In this latest text, she offers a retheorization of power and governance that challenges Foucauldian biopolitics. In its place, Povinelli maps a mode of power that she calls geontopower: a power that operates over the distinction between Life and Nonlife. Together with accounts of ethnographic encounters in Indigenous Australia, Povinelli’s text weaves together political theory, anthropology, philosophy, and cultural studies. With consequences for human geographers as well as thinkers concerned with the Anthropocene, climate change, and new materialism, Povinelli’s work connects the experience of late liberalism and settler colonialism across space, place, and matter.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.016
Scholarly communication0.0080.009
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and Planning C Politics and SpaceSame topicGeographies of human-animal interactionsFrench-language works237,207