Bibliographic record
Abstract
Arctic-focused networking events are gaining prominence as sites of transnational and transprofessional governance. Central among such events is the Arctic Circle Assembly, an annual conference that takes place in Reykjavik in October. This paper uses Arctic conferences in general and the Arctic Circle Assembly in particular to examine transnational and transprofessional knowledge-creation, a process that requires regular interaction across national and professional boundaries. Conceptually, the paper draws on political geography, international relations, and anthropology to investigate interaction, socialization, and sociability in international governance. Empirically and methodologically, it combines participant observation at eight major Arctic meetings in 2022-25 with over thirty in-person interviews with those who organize and attend such events. My principal focus is not on the big picture of the meetings' goals but on the small details of their social milieu. I seek to give a 'peopled' or ethnographic account of the events to foreground the social workings of transprofessional interaction. The question to ask is not only how Arctic networks work and how they matter but also how the Arctic networking events work and how they matter. Beyond the Arctic, the paper advances our understanding of the spaces and practices of international governance.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".