MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2298682747

Introduction to After Effects: Performing the Ends of Memory

2009· article· en· W2298682747 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePerformance paradigm · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMemory, Trauma, and Commemoration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNewspaperHeadlineArt historyHistoryYesterdayPerformance artArtGermanLiteratureVisual artsMedia studiesSociologyPhilosophyLinguisticsArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The German city of Cologne woke up yesterday without a memory. (Boyes, 2009) In March of this year we were both struck by an image in the Times Online of a collapsed archives building in Cologne, which, before becoming a ‘pile of smouldering brickwork’, had held the manuscripts of Karl Marx, the letters of Friedrich Hegel, edicts issued by Napoleon and King Louis XIV, and an early document dating back to 922 (Boyes, 2009). The event was suggestive enough, yet the newspaper account was arguably even more so. The headline ran ‘The city without a memory’ and the article noted that ‘There was even less warning of the collapse of the building than would have been given during a nuclear attack’. Even the typos were evocative, with an image caption rather endearingly referring to the ‘six-story’ building. Inevitably the loss was read through the prism of other, prior losses – some of the documents ‘had been recovered from library buildings smashed by Allied bombing during the Second World War’, the damage was compared to that caused by a fire in the Anna Amalia library in Weimar 2004, and a reader (Jessica of Indianapolis) commented ‘It’s the library in Alexandria all over again.’ Intriguingly, it was also read in terms of future losses: John of Vancouver chastised the archive for not having digitised the documents, while Daniel of London opined ‘This story will trouble my sleep. My epiphany, my moment of clarity may have been prompted by a piece of literature now lost. I shall never know.’ Of course, these statements are both overblown and incomplete. What we would add to them is that while Cologne may have woken up without an archive, it has not woken up without a memory (Taylor, 2003). Yet this event, its reporting, and the response to it seem to literalise a cultural moment in which memory collapses under its own weight, in which citizens (both local and global) are traumatised both by the event (what has happened), and the non-event (what was never to happen – they will never read that book that they were unlikely to read anyway). In fact, it seems to speak to the parallel conversations taking place across trauma studies, memory studies, and performance studies, for how it positioned notions of the “unspeakable” familiar to trauma discourse, alongside notions of the “restorative” or “repeatable” familiar to memory discourse. Hence to write about performing the ends of memory is to write at the intersection of two prefixes: the ‘re’ and the ‘un’, where one can simultaneously mourn the loss of Marx and Hegel’s original documents and nonetheless celebrate their endless repetition(s) in contemporary research in the Humanities. As a post-discipline, performance studies attempts to find pathways through these oppositional pulls, where performance itself is at once recollective and generative, an unrepeatable event that is nonetheless constituted through acts of repetition.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score0.827

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.263 · 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