MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7043616632

Sustainable Urban Foragings in the Canadian Metropolis: Rummaging through Rita Wong’s Forage and Nicholas Dickner’s Nikolski

2013· article· en· W7043616632 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Huddersfield Repository (University of Huddersfield) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEcocriticism and Environmental Literature
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNucleofectionGestational periodTSG101HyporeflexiaDiafiltrationArticular cartilage damageFusible alloyLiquation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Foraging and dumpster diving are two activities now associated with a kind of environmentally-conscious social activism engaged in by people wanting to live sustainably through maintaining a close connection with their local environment; the former is generally associated with nature, the latter with the urban. Wong's poetry collection and Dickner's novel, both featuring those who scavenge within their urban environment, enable a connection to be made between these activities; to label dumpster diving 'urban foraging' is to make clear the way the dumpster diver helps us to interrogate the urban/nature binary. This article uses Michel de Certeau's 'Walking in the City', in particular, to think through Wong and Dickner's figurations of the two Canadian metropolises: Vancouver and Montreal. These cities become places of subversive urban foraging; the garbage becomes transformed through renewed visibility, while in turn the urban space is re-made, potentially, as a place of sustainable possibility.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.556

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0380.030
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.144
Teacher spread0.138 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Huddersfield Repository (University of Huddersfield)Same topicEcocriticism and Environmental LiteratureFrench-language works237,207