MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283795743 · doi:10.25071/2563-3694.116

Who Holds the Knife

2022· article· en· W4283795743 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Naiomi M. Perera

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Sociology Journal of Critical Praxis · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSouth African History and Culture
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolice brutalityOfficerPower (physics)Punitive damagesWhite (mutation)LawCriminologyState (computer science)Criminal justicePolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ma’Khia Bryant was killed by a police officer on April 20, 2021, at the age of 16. Ma’Khia held a knife, as the officer pointed his gun and fired four shots. Police officers across the globe have taken the lives of many since, and if the current “justice” system is not transformed, they will continue to take many more. Through the following poem, I ask the reader to reflect on the violence and collective suffering that is perpetrated through state power and policing. I ask them to look upon the world through the lens of Foucault’s biopolitics and Mbembe’s necropolitics, to recognize the insignificance of Ma’Khia’s knife within a social order that marks us all as either deserving of life or deserving of death. By including the voice of white supremacist carcerality within my account, I encourage readers to consider how they hold this knife; that is, how they help to fix this violent, punitive system in place. Most importantly, by inviting readers to participate in the healing of collective wounds, I offer an abolitionist call to action. Content warning: this poem contains discussion of state violence, police brutality, and blood.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0160.012
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew Sociology Journal of Critical PraxisSame topicSouth African History and CultureFrench-language works237,207