MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125953149 · doi:10.1177/0961463x09354421

What If Time Is a Dimension of Events, Not an Envelope for Them?

2010· article· en· W2125953149 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

VenueTime & Society · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPosthumanist Ethics and Activism
Canadian institutionsTrent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPostmodernismEmpiricismThe RenaissanceDimension (graph theory)AestheticsEpistemologyHistorySociologyLiteraturePhilosophyArtArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Any discussion of time must first indicate what kind of time is involved. Most discussions of time simply take for granted a particular kind of time, one which was invented for modern Europe beginning in the Quattrocento and perfected in the nineteenth century, one which has been specific to a particular phase of western culture, and its empiricist tendencies. This kind of time has been broadly challenged since the turn of the twentieth century and across the range of practice from art to physics, and a new kind of time has emerged from these challenges. Just as ‘modern’ time emerged from the Renaissance, so what might be called postmodern or discursive time has emerged from the tectonic cultural shifts of the past century. This essay distinguishes between these two kinds of time as they effect discussion of important topics, for example the topic of gender.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.787
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.283 · 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