Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article serves as an introduction to the notion of “presence,” as described by Runia, and applies this concept to our understandings of memory, particularly involuntary memory, and personal experience. Presence is understood as the way the past resides in the present, but is unrepresented, outside of the usual venues of textual or visual representation. The discovery of presence—such as in the experience of involuntary memories—leads us to ask, “who are we that we have memory?” Questioning along ontological lines, memory is reformulated from the standpoint of being-in-the-world. In a vein not unlike Proust’s Remembrance of Things Past, this article presents a discussion of presence interwoven with first person narrative segments. It is suggested that presence works through metonymy, where meanings are revealed (viz. alethia) when a combination of factors, including time, contextual cues, and other meanings interconnect. It is concluded that memory is contained in the world, not just in the head, and further consideration of the ontology of memory, subjectivity, and their grounding in the world is warranted. Transcendence and personal growth are based on our ability to confront presence in our lives and to make meaningful connections that we evolve with or beyond.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".