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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the context of the 2011 London riots and the 'Occupy Wall Street' protests, I question what it means to be literate by contrasting communication strategies (used effectively by social networking young people to provoke social change), against banal official forms of literacy (defined by large scale state-mandated curriculum and assessment exercises) as used to close it down. By focusing on ways in which twenty-first century constructions of 'history' 'child' 'book' and 'shop' are pre-figured by the late-Enlightenment constructions of those terms, I explain that an eighteenth revolutionary ethos (formed largely in the aftermaths of the French and American revolutions) can be used as a precedent for an emerging twenty-first century ethos – which although revolutionary, is as yet undefined. To demonstrate how late-Enlightenment constructions of my four key terms, history, child, book and shop, prefigure their twenty-first century '2.0' counterparts, I locate my discussion in the children's book businesses of each period. Taking my cue from Marshall McLuhan's prescient aphorism, 'we march backwards into the future', I show how education is used, as he says, 'as an instrument of cultural aggression, imposing upon retribalized youth the obsolescent visual values of the dying literate age'.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.002 |
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 it