Place-based approaches to develop the foundations and diversities of energy geographies
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
Although geographers are well-positioned to increase the impact and salience of critical, spatially centred and place-based scholarship about energy, highlight that energy geographies do not occupy a central position in climate scholarship, or within human geography, and suggest three pathways to bring energy geographies to the centre of the discipline. Taking a biophysically informed, experientially grounded, place-based perspective to expand on the positioning of energy geographies and justice, I argue that although energy geography may occupy a marginal position within both human geography and energy scholarship, its concerns often lie at the heart of understanding the drivers and dynamics of energy transitions. The practice of actively listening to students and clearly articulating our ideas to help them situate themselves within the subfield are crucial while also enabling energy geographers to refine and expand the conceptual and theoretical foundations of energy geographies. This pedagogical engagement fosters a more heterogeneous and inclusive scholarly community.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it