MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2322224893 · doi:10.1177/1555412015571182

Deliberate Constructions of the Mind

2015· article· en· W2322224893 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew Jason Wells

Bibliographic record

VenueGames and Culture · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWrightWork (physics)Computer scienceSociologyEpistemologyExploratory researchCognitive sciencePsychologySocial sciencePhilosophyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When renowned game designer Will Wright designed and developed SimCity, the first “software toy” released by his company Maxis, he was strongly influenced by a 20-year-old text on urban planning written by Jay Forrester of MIT. I will argue in this article that we can only understand Wright’s actions if we think of the game model he developed as a fictional text. Yet Forrester’s work, which had been heavily criticized by urban planners, may also be considered as a work of fiction. I rely here on Gough’s theories concerning the utility of fiction in exploratory research as well as Smithers’ work on exploratory, freeform design work. Both of these models—Wright’s and Forrester’s—may be adapted, altered, or mined to create new fictional models. I will also cite Woolgar’s technology as-text paradigm to explain the ways in which these model texts differ.

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 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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.819
Threshold uncertainty score0.201

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGames and CultureSame topicLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesFrench-language works237,207