Bibliographic record
Abstract
The archive serves to organize mental and enforced orders in the shape of appropriate structures and to preserve the memory of past orders through their material-discursive traces. From the perspective of a logic of the manifold, however, the fruitless search for the one origin is as meaningless as the definition of a future. Yet, to work on the conceptualization and further development of utopian spaces of possibility does not necessarily involve the abandoning of either conventional archaeological practices or established archives. Rather, in this paper, I make a plea for effective complements, which involve thought-provoking nomenclatures. Anarchives and anarchaeology present such performative provocations. Following a logic of plurality and wealth of variants, they are particularly suited to handle events and movements. They do not lay claim to leadership. Nor do they claim to truthfully know where things come from and where they may be headed to. The origin is and remains a trap. Anarchives and anarchaeological practices do not follow any external purpose; they indulge in waste and offer presents best-suited to the contemporary remains of the arts. They insist on the utopian potential within archaeology: the search for a world not identical to the one we experience(d), the opposition of the factual space of past with a potential space that lets both, however tensely, approach each other.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".