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
Though the memory play represents an increasingly familiar and substantial sub-genre of drama, its conventions — and what might be called its "ontology" — have generally avoided direct scrutiny. By asking the audience to accept the framing narrator's substantiality, but to take the other characters as aspects of that narrator's memory, the memory play poses something of a metaphysical puzzle: namely, how to account for our ability to see into the world of the narrator's memory. Do we assume some telepathic contact with the narrator, or does he possess the ability to make the objects of his memory materialize? Admittedly, similar questions were raised about how the audience at a Shakespearean drama could account for being so swiftly transported across the Mediterranean, and were famously dismissed as shortsightedly pedantic by Samuel Johnson. One of the most often noted hallmarks of modem drama, however, is the employment of metatheatrical techniques that implicitly or explicitly challenge spectators to a conscious examination of their assumptions toward what they observe behind the curtain.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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