MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013993662 · doi:10.7202/037351ar

Poetry, Science, and the Epistemological Debate

2007· article· en· W2013993662 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
John Picchione

Bibliographic record

VenueTTR traduction terminologie rédaction · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCreativity in Education and Neuroscience
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoetryMateriality (auditing)SubjectivityDistancingConsciousnessEpistemologyPhilosophySociologyAestheticsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Linguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Poetry, Science, and the Epistemological Debate — The last few decades have witnessed a radical questioning of the cognitive possibilities traditionally associated both with science and literature. This article gives a brief overview of the debate and provides a critique of the deconstructive and post-modern theories in their attempt to subvert fundamental epistemological claims. The article then addresses the specificity of poetic cognition and, distancing itself from mimetic conceptions of poetry, proposes that poiêsis entails a peculiar creation of reality, unattainable with other tools. It is the uniqueness of the materiality of poetic language that contributes to the formation of subjectivity and to the expansion of human reality and consciousness.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.305 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTTR traduction terminologie rédactionSame topicCreativity in Education and NeuroscienceFrench-language works237,207