MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399201792 · doi:10.47061/jasc.v4i1.8100

Art and Science of ‘Escape’

2024· article· en· W4399201792 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Fiona McKenzie, Megan Seneque

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Awareness-Based Systems Change · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTravel Writing and Literature
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAstrobiologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As authors we draw from our experience of hosting two virtual design and imagination labs, where we took a deep dive into the evolution of our economic system with a diverse group, and had a profound collective experience imagining possible alternatives that promote wellbeing and flourishing of people and planet. These labs were convened by the David Suzuki Foundation in Turtle Island/Canada during the pandemic. In each Lab, approximately 60 participants were invited from across government, First Nations communities, civil society, academia, and activism. Both the process of inviting, and the lab design and process, were carefully curated with an intention to bring different world views and perspectives to take a deep dive into re-imagining our economic system. As pracademics and systems change practitioners, we reflect on what is required to make visible the underlying conditions (including worldviews, myths, and metaphors) that keep our current systems in place, and what might be needed to free ourselves to imagine alternatives. We refer to this liberation as ‘escape’ and propose six elements of ‘escape’ for transformation. The process of unlearning and releasing ourselves from unhelpful limiting assumptions and worldviews applies to those ‘facilitating’ these processes of systemic change, as much as it applies to those participating in the labs. This form of collective practice requires constant vigilance, as no single methodology of framework is fit for purpose. We reflect on what this kind of methodological pluralism invites and offers, as we bring together different ways of knowing and different knowledge systems, and re-imagine alternatives that recognise the limitations and impact of our current economic system on people and planet.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.140
Scholarly communication0.0190.022
Open science0.0030.010
Research integrity0.0070.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Awareness-Based Systems ChangeSame topicTravel Writing and LiteratureFrench-language works237,207