<i>Almanac for the Anthropocene: A Compendium of Solarpunk Futures</i>. Edited by Phoebe Wagner and Brontë Christopher Wieland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phoebe Wagner and Brontë Christopher Wieland’s edited collection Almanac for the Anthropocene: A Compendium of Solarpunk Futures is nuanced, thoughtful, and a joy to read. Solarpunk, as a movement encompassing (but not limited to) speculative fiction, art, fashion, architecture, activism, lifestyle, and philosophy, is often defined by its diversity—of identities, of sociopolitics, of theoretical styles, of activist strategies—and the Almanac demonstrates this in its wide variety of both essays and contributors. The Almanac exemplifies the solarpunk strategy of “adapting theory to local reality” (1), moving from context of the Anthropocene and a history of the generic roots of solarpunk (“Introduction”), to the historical forces giving rise to the events of this moment that affect our day-to-day reality and how solarpunk can affect our imagination of a better future (“Part 1”), to the way that individuals can use solarpunk thought and action in their personal lives (“Part 2”), to contextualizing the individual solarpunk in their community of human and more-than-human beings in their environments (“Part 3”), to how readers can put all of this careful thought into concrete action (“Part 4”) in service of making life better in the here and now.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.111 | 0.053 |
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".