Longer Distance Cycling for Interspecies Mobility Justice in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores how longer distance cycling, by rendering distance as a conceptual measure embedded in the production of space rather than an abstract quantitative unit, can advance interspecies mobility justice. The article theorizes longer distance cycling not as some specific number of kilometres, but rather as the social production of cycling space across gentrified central cities, struggling inner suburbs, outlying exurbs and rural countrysides. I argue that longer distance cycling can advance interspecies mobility justice - a theory of (im)mobilities and justice that includes other-than-human individuals and habitats as worthy of our positive moral obligations - by promoting socially inclusive and ecologically good cycling practices that redress the active travel poverty of marginalized and colonized populations, while replacing rather than augmenting auto roads with active travel routes that help humans respect other species. To explore this argument my analysis focuses on Canada, an extreme context for longer distance cycling. I offer a comparison of two case studies, situated on the country's west and east coasts, Vancouver, British Columbia and Halifax, Nova Scotia, drawing on an ongoing ethnographic study of cycling practices and politics in Canada.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".