Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores sample-based hip-hop (Schloss, 2004) as a mode of critical knowledge-practice. Situated in the broader context of breakbeat culture as a feature of hip-hop music-making, hip-hop sampling is considered in its technical, aesthetic, formal, discursive and intellectual aspects. The "internal logic" (Schloss, 2004) of sample-based hip-hop is explored in how it illustrates "Afrological" versus "Eurological" musical tendencies (Lewis, 2004a; Stewart, 2010). These tendencies are examined in the context of the technological and material transformations heralded by the advent of digital technologies, rendering hip-hop sampling an example of Afrological compositional-improvisative music-making. Hip-hop sampling is hereby used to sound the critical and theoretical stakes of academic critical writing regarding idiomatically specific practices such as hip-hop sampling, at the same time as highlighting how sample-based hip-hop constitutes a mode of "critical culture" (Stiegler, 2006) in its own right.
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 | 0.002 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".