MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Outside the Frame: Reexamining Photographic Representations of Mourning

2014· article· en· W2028641675 on OpenAlexaff
Marta Zarzycka

Bibliographic record

VenuePhotography and Culture · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParticipatory Visual Research Methods
Canadian institutionsFields Institute for Research in Mathematical Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeocolonialismQueerTrope (literature)NationalismContext (archaeology)PatriarchyPoliticsNarrativeSociologyAestheticsGender studiesHistoryLiteratureArtPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Documentary photographs of war, violence, and death shape the way we think about loss. In this article, I engage with two widely disseminated images of mourning women, deployed to denote the ravages of war and disaster. I argue that the trope of a mourning woman, although undeniably affective, is deeply grounded in the cultural notion of melancholia. While acknowledging Freud's model and its contestations by queer and postcolonial activism, I follow how melancholia in these photographs either absorbs loss into the general economy of compassion or becomes a tool of propaganda within the sanctioned boundaries of patriarchy, nationalism, or neocolonialism. Employing visual and discourse analysis, I point to the cultural mediations surrounding globally broadcast images of mourning women and undermine the monolithic structure of grieving constructed by the political mechanisms that insert female bodies into a universal and manageable narrative. This offers a chance to recognize the photographs of mourning women not as removed from a particular context or taken over by the political agenda, but rather as open-ended, interactive and resilient to closure.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.017
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.280
GPT teacher head0.553
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations6
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhotography and CultureSame topicParticipatory Visual Research MethodsFrench-language works237,207