Naming the abyss: The symbolic politics of the oceanic toponymic frontier
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract With the recent, constantly growing interest in the critical geography of the oceans and critical toponymy, there is still plenty of space for theoretical, methodological and practical interconnections between these emerging subfields. Despite some sporadic examples of critical analysis of the names of the islands and seas, the ocean floor and the open ocean remain unexplored spaces in critical toponymic investigations. This paper aims to fill this gap by introducing the concept of the toponymic frontier , focusing on the spatial‐political dimension of the names of the natural submarine features (bathyonyms). Drawing on critical toponymy and critical geography of the oceans' theoretical literature and using the empirical database of more than 5000 bathyonyms and the secondary resources represented by the international media, official reports and governmental websites, this paper develops a base for a conceptual framework for analysing the marine place names as (geo)politically and political‐economically motivated symbolic elements of the oceanic voluminous realm. Finally, the paper paves the way for future debates related to the politics of place naming in the contested spaces of the hydrosphere and the generation of reinvigorated productive insights in critical toponymic studies.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it