MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127566247 · doi:10.25071/1916-4467.31333

The Ethico-Aesthetics of Affect and a Sensational Pedagogy

2011· article· en· W2127566247 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPosthumanist Ethics and Activism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffect (linguistics)SketchAestheticsPoliticsKnowledge productionSociologyOrder (exchange)EpistemologyPsychologyArtPhilosophyPolitical scienceLawComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay’s main purpose is to sketch the relations between affect, politics, and everyday life in order to think sensationally about pedagogy. Thinking affectively about politics differs from approaches that are a direct analysis of signs and discourses, morals and rationales. As opposed to an understanding of affect as something to be captured, controlled, rationalized, and suppressed, I attempt to reclaim the affective in order to consider the body’s intensities and compositions in knowledge production. Using a performance/interventionist artwork “The Lactation Station Breastmilk Bar” as a site from which to think about an affective, and thus an aesthetic approach to politics, I emphasize the importance of sensation in knowledge production.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.588
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.292 · 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