MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4244520853 · doi:10.1057/9780230304741_10

Conclusion

2011· book-chapter· en· W4244520853 on OpenAlexaff
S. J. Kline

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · 2011
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRisk Perception and Management
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following Ulrich Beck, I have tried to trace the part played by ‘environmental risk analysis’ in the discursive politics of globesity. Paralleling Beck’s emphasis on ecological advocacy in the environmental politics, I have set out to document the growing importance of risk sciences within the discursive politics of child empowerment through a case study of the ‘globesity pandemic’. Beck’s optimism about reflexive modernity was founded on his belief that the struggles over environmentalism were ultimately producing awareness of the unsustainability of the industrial economy. Although Beck well understood that the market economy was a complex system of risk distribution, he failed to pay attention to the complicity of citizens in risk allocation decisions through their consumption practices. What I have called lifestyle risks are produced by corporations but also consumed by citizens in the course of their daily choices. As the case of global warming illustrates, mitigating climate change depends not only on climate science but its acceptance within a democratic politics of lifestyle change. So too with the health issues flagged by globesity, which as my comparative case study has shown, depended on anxieties about media-saturated domesticity and the discursive politics galvanized by food marketing to children.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.820
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1800.064

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.240 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooksSame topicRisk Perception and ManagementFrench-language works237,207