MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7137486067

Making Humanitarian Crises

2022· other· en· W7137486067 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDirectory of Open access Books (OAPEN Foundation) · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversité de GenèveSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science FoundationUniversity of CambridgeUniversity of OxfordYork UniversityInstitute on the Environment, University of MinnesotaUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignStrong
KeywordsEmpathyAgency (philosophy)PoliticsPerceptionPrismHumanitarian crisis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This open access collection of essays explores the emotional agency of images in the construction of ‘humanitarian crises’ from the nineteenth century to the present. Using the prism of the histories of emotions and the senses, the chapters examine the pivotal role images have in shaping cultural, social and political reactions to the suffering of others and to the establishment of the international networks of solidarity. Questioning certain emotions assumed to underlie humanitarianism such as sympathy, empathy and compassion, they demonstrate how the experience of such emotions has shifted over time. Understanding images as emotional objects, contributors from a wide horizon of disciplines explore how their production, circulation and reception has been crucial to the perception of humanitarian crises in a long-term historical perspective.

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)0.003
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: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0070.012
Scholarly communication0.0080.008
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.249
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.222 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDirectory of Open access Books (OAPEN Foundation)→French-language works237,207→