MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214923337 · doi:10.1002/9781119558071.ch14

Decolonial Geographies

2019· other· en· W4214923337 on OpenAlexaff
Michelle Daigle, Margaret Marietta Ramírez

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAnthropological Studies and Insights
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisionEmbodied cognitionIndigenousFraming (construction)SociologyAestheticsAnthropologyGeographyArtEpistemologyEcologyArchaeologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Throughout five years of collaboration, the authors have been building a language for decolonial geographies. They understand decolonial geographies to be a diverse and interconnected landscape grounded in the particularities of each place. This chapter focuses on the spatial weavings of decolonial geographies as they take form on stolen and occupied Indigenous lands and waters. It theorises decolonial geographies as a constellation in formation. The chapter traces this language from Nishnaabeg scholar, activist and artist Leanne Betasamosake Simpson's work on constellations of co-resistance, while the author's spatial framing stems from bringing Indigenous geographies into dialogue with the geneologies of Black geographies envisioned by Katherine McKittrick and Clyde Woods (2007). The chapter also situates decolonial geographies within embodied theories and praxes of liberation to elucidate the connective fabric of various decolonial struggles. It elaborates on constellations in formation, as embodied in the present, to envision radical spatial visions of the future.

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)0.006
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0080.016
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.002

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.301 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations129
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAnthropological Studies and InsightsFrench-language works237,207