Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article is a contribution to the growing body of work that has emphasized the need to develop a theoretical framework capable of exploring metaphorical communication as a social rather than just as a cognitive process. The author draws attention to some of the social dynamics through which the inherent poly-valence of metaphors becomes stabilized, though never entirely neutralized. Specifically, he highlights the ways in which context, practices, and space serve to close down potential meanings. This is followed by an analysis of the deployment of a musical metaphor—nucleotide-bases-as-musical-notes that produce the “music of life”—in the context of a traveling science exhibition, The Geee! in Genome, whose stated goal is to educate and stimulate debate among the Canadian public. The author shows that although the musical metaphor lacks heuristic utility as a tool for explaining the “science” in the exhibition, it contributes to the staging of genomics and “life” itself as a spectacle; this makes it possible to frame contentious issues around genetic determinism, biotechnology-enabled health care, enhancement, commodification, and property rights in a more hospitable semantic terrain.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.049 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.017 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".