Bibliographic record
Abstract
This handbook provides an expansive and multi-disciplinary interrogation of the spaces and places of law, advancing cutting-edge insights as to the numerous intersections of space, place and law in our lives. We engage relationally in a material world - of space and place - within which we are inter-dependent and reliant, and governed by laws in a dynamic process rarely linear and never fixed. This collection combines contributions from around the world focusing on methodology, embodied experience, legal pluralism, conflict and resistance, non-human and place agency, and covering cross-cutting themes including social (in)equality and environmental justice, sustainability, urban development, Indigenous legal systems, colonialism and property law. A diversity of places and spaces are represented, spanning Australia, Bolivia, Canada, China, France, Fiji, India, Kiribati, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Singapore, South Africa, Thailand, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Scholars, students and practitioners will find this a valuable compendium of the breadth and strength of scholarship in space, place and law.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".