MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1559436577

Means and Motives: The Mystification of Mountaineering Discourse

2006· article· en· W1559436577 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jon F. Gordon

Bibliographic record

VenuePostcolonial text · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFolklore, Mythology, and Literature Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMountaineeringSubjectivityAestheticsDominance (genetics)SociologyRelation (database)EpistemologyGender studiesHistoryArtPhilosophyComputer scienceArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mountaineers rely on technologies both to make the ascent of mountains physically possible, and to aid in structuring representations of ascents as the means of subjective consolidation. Insofar as they are cyborgs, they are incapable of purity (of either means or motives); and, insofar as they are unwilling to recognize their impurity, they are perpetuating a system of dominance. This essay will examine the agonistic relation between discourses of purity and discourses of technology in three mountaineering texts, with the aim of showing their interconnectedness and irreconcilability. While mountaineering seeks to affirm agential subjectivity, it mystifies the motives for doing so, covering over impure motives by representing pure ones.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.906
Threshold uncertainty score0.223

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePostcolonial textSame topicFolklore, Mythology, and Literature StudiesFrench-language works237,207