MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2220848092 · doi:10.21810/sfuer.v1i.331

Faux Connaître: Getting It and Not Getting It

2007· article· en· W2220848092 on OpenAlex
Hartley Banack, Catherine Broom, Heesoon Bai

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

VenueSFU Educational Review · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFoucault, Power, and Ethics
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPower (physics)NegationSociologyEpistemologyInstitutionTerminologyDreamPolitical sciencePublic relationsPsychologySocial sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Borders not only limit contact and exchange but they often connect and create ways of communication and interaction. To establish and maintain both limits and contact, power must come into play. Thus borders act as a “technology of power,” to use Foucault’s terminology. While the Foucauldian decentralization of power from institutionalized centres does not directly comment on ethics of power, it helps us to understand better the complexity of ethical relationships that emerge from the workings of power through a myriad of borders. This panel will consider Foucauldian perspectives on how power might operate within a proposal of education with/out borders, especially as it might pertain to our Faculty of Education at Simon Fraser University. Panellists will be asked to discuss the following questions: 1) Might Foucault’s works ever suggest a possibility of living without borders and limits? What is the implication of this question for an educational institution like ours? 2) What could a notion of ‘without’ imply in terms of a utopian dream and an epistemological negation that posits and positions power relations?

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.735
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.369 · 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