A research agenda for GIScience in a time of disruptions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social issues, AI, and climate change are just a few of the disruptive focuses impacting science. The field of GIScience is well positioned to respond to accelerating disruptions due to the interdisciplinary nature of the field and the ability of GIScience approaches to be used in support of decision-making. This manuscript aims to start a conversation that will establish a research agenda for GIScience in an age of disruptions. We outline three guiding principles: (1) focusing on the relevance and real-world impact of research, (2) adopting systems-based thinking and contextual approaches and (3) emphasizing inclusive practices. We then outline prioritized research areas organized by what topics are important focal areas (Data and Infrastructure, Artificial Intelligence, and Causality and Generalizability), and what approaches to science we should be attentive to (Impactful Open Science, Collaborative and Convergent Science, and through Diverse Participation and Partnerships). We conclude with a call to increase impact by balancing slow science with practical and policy-oriented research. We also recognize that while broad adoption of spatial approaches is a signal of GIScience's success, we should continue to work together to advance core knowledge centered on spatial thinking and approaches.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".