MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2323152283 · doi:10.1386/des.3.1.124_1

The new curses of tomb space

2013· article· en· W2323152283 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ben Woodard

Bibliographic record

VenueDesign Ecologies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSpace Science and Extraterrestrial Life
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpenness to experienceContradictionSpace (punctuation)ContingencyClosure (psychology)NeutrinoRelation (database)HistoryTheoretical physicsPhysicsPolitical scienceLawComputer sciencePhilosophyPsychologyEpistemologyNuclear physicsSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the 1980s, the United States Department of Energy created The Human Interference Task Force, a group of semioticians, physicists, science-fiction writers and anthropologists tasked with creating an everlasting warning to prevent future beings from unintentionally disturbing nuclear waste repositories. The proposed systems ranged from warning orbital satellites to glowing radioactive cat companions, to setting up an atomic priest hood, to surrounding the site with giant black thorns. These paranoic strategies of radical closure can be further examined in comparison and contradiction to the openness of the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory in which massive quantities of pure water are housed in order to detect the passage of weakly interacting neutrinos. This site of inviting invasion is at the same time isolated and buried deep in the earth. These two examples demonstrate that the attempt to combat and the attempt to welcome contingency involve complex and twisted modes of closure and openness as demonstrated by the work of Reza Negarestani. By investigating these models, I hope to investigate how the intimacies of geological formation cross into and disrupt the purported stability of space (both as outer space and abstract space) in relation to chemistry, both inorganic and astrobiological.

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 score0.669
Threshold uncertainty score0.501

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDesign EcologiesSame topicSpace Science and Extraterrestrial LifeFrench-language works237,207