MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117542881 · doi:10.1177/0270467612459927

The Autonomy of Technique as a Social and Historical Description

2012· article· en· W2117542881 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of Science Technology & Society · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSpace Science and Extraterrestrial Life
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTechnological determinismSociologyDeterminismAction (physics)IndustrialisationAutonomyMythologySocial lifeEnvironmental ethicsSocial scienceEpistemologyPolitical scienceLawHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores the social and historical conditions under which “people changing technology” overshadows that of “technology changing people” through its influence on human life, society, and the biosphere. Social construction and determinism are thus two sides of the same coin. However, both ignore the inseparability of thoughts and action from lives, lives from communities, and communities from their historical journeys. This hides from view the possibility of technology becoming a secular myth, in the sense of cultural anthropology. The current discipline-based intellectual and professional division of labor treats the living world as if it were structured the way technology is. As a result, human life has become “digitized,” since the process of industrialization transformed human life and society to make the computer and information revolution both possible and necessary. It has also misdirected our sense of responsibility for technology.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.594
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.240 · 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