DZIGA VERTOV AND STEVE MANN: THE EMBODIMENT OF THE MASTER METAPHOR OF VISION
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At the intersection of technology and culture, the master metaphor of vision maintains a prominent position. The privileged status of sight in Western culture can be understood as part of the striving to see the world more clearly, to combat distortion and gain an “objective” view. At the turn of the century, new imaging technologies were put into practice as a part of a utopic hope for the future and the modernist project to dispel myth. At the turn of the new millennium, the ubiquitous presence of technologies comprises a controlling system against which we must renew our vision once again. In both contexts, the use of imaging technologies offer liberating possibilities by bringing attention to controlling devices which conspire to remain hidden. Further, theoretical inquiry into the study of technology and culture is often concerned with questions of vision, and approaches are often articulated through metaphors of vision. Within this framework, the writing and practice of both Dziga Vertov (1896-1954) and Steve Mann (1962—) can be studied as embodied approaches to the meeting place of theory, technology and 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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it