The Third Clan: Ecocriticism and Topocriticism of Minority Echoes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
According to British journalist David Goodhart, there are two clans in the world today: the white-collar workers who are "from everywhere" and impose their views on those who, desperately "from somewhere", take a back seat and sometimes rebel, donning their yellow vests or red hats. There may well be a third clan: a group of minority societies which, from university conferences to cultural events, recognise each other. Brittany is looking to the Pacific and its minorities: Māori were featured at the Douarnenez Film Festival in 2001, Inuit and Aboriginal art were the subject of an exhibition at Daoulas Abbey in 2010, while L’École des Filles in Huelgoat has on several occasions taken an interest in Victor Segalen’s travels. As Bretons, we are free to see in each of these manifestations some illustration of our own situation and to recognise in others the same desire for cultural recognition and linguistic freedom. But is this not all just an intellectual and somewhat artificial construct? The aim of this article is to help us understand and hear these minority echoes outside of the salons and museums. If they are audible, it is undoubtedly in a particular
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".