MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6986338569

In permanent transit: discourses and maps of the intercultural experience

2012· book· en· W6986338569 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePortuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) · 2012
Typebook
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMachine Learning in Bioinformatics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersH2020 European Research Council
KeywordsNarrativeEthnographyAgency (philosophy)Work (physics)Qualitative researchIdentity (music)Field (mathematics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Permanent Transit: Discourses and Maps of the Intercultural Experience is a transnational project by authors from Portugal, Brazil, Macao, Canada, the Netherlands and the United States of America, that voices a truly intercultural dialogue. This compilation of essays from multiple origins, both in geographical and academic terms, covers an unexpected collection of areas often ignored by mainstream academia. It also tries to build effective epistemological bridges between anthropology, historiography, and gender, cultural, communication, literary, media, legal, and translation studies. The various colleagues invited to participate in this project created an interdisciplinary approach to the examination of migrations, traffics, technologies, communication, regulations, the media, and numerous other intercultural processes, in the context of past and present times. This is why In Permanent Transit offers a convergence of perspectives, combining conceptual and empirical work by sociologists, anthropologists, historians, linguists, educators, lawyers, media specialists, and literary studies writers, in their shared attempt to understand the many shades of the intercultural experience. In Permanent Transit: Discourses and Maps of the Intercultural Experience and its authors see the ‘intercultural’ as a movement, a journey, as a dynamic between cultures. Contemporary intercultural travel is indeed a global journey, a circumnavigation powered by the speed of new technologies. This concept of ‘intercultural’ underwrites all the comings and goings, the transmission and reception of information that are implicit in the communication, in the diversity and in the transit that the prefix ‘inter’ suggests, from the perverse intercultural dialogue of colonialism to the current cultural heteroglossia of the internet. This is why we examine the motivations, characteristics and regulations of cultural interactions in their perpetual movement, devoid of spatial or temporal borders, in a dangerous but stimulating indefinition of limits. Normative practices of modern research in the vast field of the Humanities do not privilege relations of permanence any longer, to the detriment of relations of movement, a perspective which changed as a result of the endless mobilities that travel the world today, constructed and mediated in multiple ways. As Stuart Hall (1994) states, the notions of belonging and homeland are now being reconceptualised in contexts of migration, deterritorialization, diaspora, virtuality, digitalization, and other features of the globalised world. Thus, cultural identities are not fixed, but fluid; not given but performed. In this way we cross the first great border to intercultural transit—the frontier created by the concept of culture itself—avoiding the commonplace notion of the intercultural as simply ‘us’ versus ‘them’, and steering clear of the fundamental error of an interculturalism that ignores the diversity and dynamism contained in its own definition. A book like this generates an interdisciplinary dialogue between fields that have traditionally ignored each other, because it is also intercultural at its source and subjects, not just in the objects that are examined. Because this book does not fear the alterity that, after all, it proposes to study. In Permanent Transit: Discourses and Maps of the Intercultural Experience functions as a sort of third space, to quote from Homi Bhabha (1999). A third space for hybridity, subversion, transgression. Hybridity—and cultural translation, which Bhabha regards as a synonym for hybridity—is politically subversive. Hybridity is the space where all binary divisions and antagonisms, typical for modernist political concepts, including the old opposition between theory and politics, do not work anymore. They don’t work in these pages either. New research centres, modern universities and evolving polytechnics have promoted cultural relationships and dynamics otherwise unimaginable. Present day converging interests are evident in the expectations of both publishers and the reading public and in the relations of power that shape stereotypical academic life. These notions and expectations persistently transform the output of young researchers, to the extent that they tend to adapt their practices and creative capabilities to professional and economic pressures. However, many of those young researchers often respond to such pressures with their own strategies, innovations and subversions, and seldom do they remain passive within the process of incorporation in large scale political and academic systems. Networks and echoes emanating from the international academic community spread rapidly throughout the globe and their multiple forms of cultural interaction bring with them their own forms of manipulation and subversion of power. These actions carried out in the ‘peripheries’—and which are, in turn, central in the lives and experiences of individuals—can be designated and described, more or less metaphorically, as “borderzones” (Bruner, 1996: 157-79), “intersecting discursive fields” (Tsing, 1993), academic diasporas, or “spaces on the side of the road” (Stewart, 1996), all of them reflecting the dialogic nature of culture.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0140.026
Scholarly communication0.0130.016
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePortuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT)→Same topicMachine Learning in Bioinformatics→French-language works237,207→