MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414615719 · doi:10.1080/0966369x.2025.2559901

Queering feminist geography III: calling all allies and accomplices

2025· article· en· W4414615719 on OpenAlexaff
Eden Kinkaid, Cristina Diamant, N.H. Koenig, Aila Bandagi Kandlakunta, Rowan Rush‐Morgan, Kelsey Emard, LaToya E. Eaves, Colleen C. Myles, Wiley Sharp, Julia Wagner, Markia Silverman-Rodríguez, Jennifer C. Langill, A. Marie Ranjbar, Thien‐Kim Bui, Alicia Danze, Heather Davis, Ingrid L. Nelson, Lindsay Naylor, Niiyokamigaabaw Deondre Smiles

Bibliographic record

VenueGender Place & Culture · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicQualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaMcGill UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsField (mathematics)FeminismAgency (philosophy)QueerPerspective (graphical)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this third piece in our Queering Feminist Geography Viewpoint series, we discuss allyship for queer/trans scholars within and beyond geography. We consider when and why queer/trans geographers need allies and accomplices in our personal and professional lives. We then turn to feminist principles and praxis to guide our work to become allies for queer/trans colleagues. Finally, we make recommendations and suggest strategies for allyship.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.803
Threshold uncertainty score0.684

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.153
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.338 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGender Place & CultureSame topicQualitative Research Methods and EthicsFrench-language works237,207