Bibliographic record
Abstract
Distributed by Green Planet Films, PO Box 247, Corte Madera, CA 94976-0247; 415-377-5471Produced by Kathryn Kennedy FentonDirected by Frankie Fenton2022, Streaming, 83 mins Atomic Hope: Inside the Pro-Nuclear Movement provides a look into an oft-ignored part of the climate change movement, pro-nuclear activism. The film follows an international group of nuclear energy advocates over a ten-year period, presenting their work to advocate for nuclear energy and the pushback they receive from other members of the climate movement. Much of the film is spent sharing the argument for nuclear power, driving home the fact that nuclear energy represents the cheapest, most reliable, and quickest way to decarbonize. As Atomic Hope specifically focuses on pro-nuclear activism, it does not give any significant time to opponents of nuclear energy. Instead, the film presents information that allays the common arguments against nuclear power and provides extensive information about the benefits of nuclear power compared to other sources of clean energy. Atomic Hope shows visits to both Chernobyl and Fukushima, including commentary from nuclear scientists about both disasters and the extent and effect of radiation. The clear presentation of facts in an easy-to-understand way presents a very convincing argument for nuclear power as a relatively low-risk and safe alternative. The focus on nuclear energy sets Atomic Hope apart from other documentaries on the climate crisis, as it presents a clean energy option that is often ignored or dismissed by climate advocacy. There is a lot of good information in this film. It finds a good balance between sharing the stories and work of the nuclear advocates it highlights with extensive scientific information about the benefits of nuclear and the low risks of nuclear. Atomic Hope is very informational while still being engaging. It would be a great addition to a library collection and would be particularly useful in environmental or energy courses. It would also have appeal for general audiences interested in climate advocacy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.094 | 0.009 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".