The Daimon, the Scarebird and Haiku: Repeated Narrations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Daimon, The Scarebird and Haiku: Repeated Narrations is a discursive braiding of three texts surrounding the lived experience of embodiment. Read against and through one another, this manuscript is in part an experiment in textual disruption and derailed communication, inhabiting a liminal space teetering between recognition and the anxiety of crisis. The main body of this manuscript is haunted by multiple voices. The process of writing the main text of this manuscript is disclosed in italics, revealing in part the concepts and assumptions made by the authors prior to, and during the development of this work. The notes and thoughts of the authors during the writing of this manuscript appear in bold and point toward the inner difficulties and contested spaces of this work. As a reflexive methodology, The Daimon, The Scarebird and Haiku: Repeated Narrations might be read as an attempt at coauthoring which, while recognizing the familial, disrupts its own attempt at meaning-making. While we are aware of the difficulty this might pose for the reader, we attempt to maintain the space for interpretive possibility throughout this manuscript. This requires a certain hospitality toward interruptions, repetition, and silence. As pedagogues, we are charged with a similar task in encouraging the voice of students meaningfully, upon curriculum. In this vein, we attempt to engage the reader, as writer, in the braiding of our experiences, and seek to comeditate on the slippages and breaks inherent to the project of making meaning.
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 | 0.006 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".