MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968874987 · doi:10.3828/sfftv.2012.2

Techno-butterfly

2012· article· en· W1968874987 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eve Bennett

Bibliographic record

VenueScience Fiction Film & Television · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJapanese History and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrientalismTheme (computing)NarrativeRepresentation (politics)HistoryColonialismButterflyEast AsiaSociologyAestheticsGender studiesLiteratureArtPoliticsPolitical scienceChinaLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Starting with the observation that, as with many sf texts, colonialism is a major theme in Battlestar Galactica (2003-9), this article considers the extent to which the representation of the robot antagonists, the Cylons, reflects imperialist discourse. In particular, it focuses on the Cylon model Number Eight, played by Korean-Canadian actress Grace Park, in the light of David Morley and Kevin Robins's work on ‘techno-orientalism’. As the name implies, techno-orientalism adapts Edward Said's influential concept of Orientalism to the late twentieth century and shifts its focus from the Eastern Mediterranean to East Asia, examining the negative stereotypes of this region produced by the West in response to the perceived threat of its economic success. However, the emergence of this discourse does not mean that older racist perceptions of Asian people and cultures have disappeared; figures such as the ‘Asian seductress’ and the ‘Madame Butterfly’ continue to appear alongside and combined with techno-orientalist imagery. This article inspects BSG for orientalist tropes and narratives both old and new, to examine the way in which they intersect and to consider whether the series ultimately upholds or subverts them.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.003

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScience Fiction Film & TelevisionSame topicJapanese History and CultureFrench-language works237,207