Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2015, amidst economic turmoil triggered by plummeting oil prices, a diverse group of organizers and theorists gathered in Toronto to confront the urgent need for a renewable energy transition. Frustrated by the lack of political will to address climate change and economic inequality, they launched the Leap Manifesto: a people’s platform offering a vision for a renewables-based economy in Canada, rooted in a duty to care for Earth’s resources and inhabitants. This essay explores the historical roots of Canada’s dependence on natural resources and the consequences of this reliance on both the environment and Indigenous communities. It argues that confronting the truth about past injustices is essential for building a sustainable future and achieving genuine reconciliation. By acknowledging the finite nature of the Earth's resources and embracing narratives of care and regeneration, this essay proposes a path forward toward a more equitable society.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.064 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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; 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".