Digging Wells, Divining a Curriculum of Hope in Slipping Fidelities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Joanna Macy (2009) suggests that a shift toward a life-sustaining civilization includes reassessing values and relooking at perceptions of reality. In this editorial, the metaphor of divining is used to explain the creation of hope in the grief-filled epoque of the Chthulucene. Authors in this issue collectively ask: How do we live together? How do we see the world? How do we make meaning? How do we tell truths? How do we make a better world? Imagination is the self and the world merging and emerging, entanglements of making that challenge our commitments and obligations as researchers. As we conduct research, we are constructing new life worlds, dreaming and shaping futures. In this editorial, I’m thinking about hope, of metaphorically digging wells, committing to the difficult work of moving through layers of barriers toward the originary whys, and knowing there are multiple truths and needs. In this process we can come to places of relation, understanding, self- and world-healing.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".