Bibliographic record
Abstract
concerned with the anthropology of the United States, Canada, and Mexico. While elements of this research tradition are addressed by applied, medical, educational, political, and urban anthropology, among others, JANA focuses upon this region as an "area" by placing research fi ndings in historical perspective and theoretical conversation. JANA is particularly committed to featuring work from diversely situated scholars that builds on critiques of inequality and violence to further envision, imagine, investigate, and enact actual alternatives to the '-isms' of our time. We aim to publish manuscripts that anchor theory-building in compelling ethnographic grounding, and we are particularly insistent that our authors avoid the temptation of simply processing a case study through a given theoretical lens. Going further, we want to invite (and challenge) authors to bring out the refl exive and ethical dimension of their work: the what is to be done? JANA publishes two issues per year, in the spring and fall. Members of the Society for the Anthropology of North America receive JANA as a benefi t of their membership.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.091 | 0.002 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".