MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094285241 · doi:10.3138/cras-s031-03-03

Avoiding Pyrrhic Victories: On Technology

2001· article· en· W2094285241 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gregory J.S. Fowler

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Review of American Studies · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedia, Religion, Digital Communication
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdiotDemiseComplaintMedia studiesAuthoritarianismProduct (mathematics)EntertainmentSociologyHistoryPsychologyAestheticsPolitical scienceLawArtLiteraturePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advanced technology without advanced thought creates not advancement, but demise. When a society becomes a product of its own technology it destroys itself. Neale Donald Walsch Rather than following a broadcast-model world for entertainment, and a broadcast-model world for learning, and a broadcast, talk-down, authoritarian world in the family and in the workplace, these kids are going to have a much more open, interactive, collaborative, verbal, thoughtful environment, and that will change the way they will be as adults. These kids will dominate the 21st century. Don Tapscott Cutting Through the ConstructsOne of my Boomer friends recently voiced frustration with social influences upon his ability to raise his child. My friend’s complaint was with the weathering away of his absolute authority as a parent. “It seems that I have very little ability to teach my child my values!” he exclaimed as we were eating dinner one evening. “If I tell my child something about the way I see the world she simply gets online and talks to someone who sees the world differently and I end up seeming like the bad guy or the idiot!”

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.024
Scholarly communication0.0130.021
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.004

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Review of American StudiesSame topicMedia, Religion, Digital CommunicationFrench-language works237,207