MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1574783704 · doi:10.1002/9781405177504.ch9

Is There a Text on This Screen? Reading in an Era of Hypertextuality

2013· other· en· W1574783704 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCultural Insights and Digital Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReading (process)CyberspaceComputer scienceContext (archaeology)Face (sociological concept)Identification (biology)The InternetAutomationWorld Wide WebLinguisticsSociologyHistoryEngineeringSocial sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter describes some of the constraints on the act of reading in an era of hypertextuality. First, it proposes a definition of what a text is, one capable of embracing the various forms it can take. Next, the chapter describes the current context of our reading practices. This provides the basis for an identification of the major difficulties we face while reading new textual forms. The author looks briefly at Richard Powers's short story “Literary Devices”, which not only plays on our limited knowledge of cyberspace and its possibilities, it begs the question: what is the future of text in an era of increasing automation?. The computer and the internet radically change our relationship with texts, the methods of their production, and our ways of reading.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.147
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.169
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.148 · 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

Quick stats

Citations37
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCultural Insights and Digital ImpactsFrench-language works237,207