MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2330059572

Digitising between the lines: representation or reading? An essay

2015· article· en· W2330059572 on OpenAlexaff
Anne Regourd

Bibliographic record

VenueRevistes Científiques de la University of Barcelona (University of Barcelona) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime, Illicit Activities, and Governance
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nautical Research Society
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObject (grammar)Reading (process)Representation (politics)Computer scienceArtificial intelligencePolitical scienceLawPolitics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This contribution is based on my experience of the digitisation of watermarked papers at Zabīd (Yemen, see http://www.anne.regourd.org/programme-­zabid). Some believe that digitisation will in future provide a more than adequate surrogate for direct experience of the original object to remote enquirers. Our work in Zabīd suggests that digitisers are surrogate readers of the original object who cannot completely anticipate the questions to be asked of the object of by remote and future enquirers.

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)0.002
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.522
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevistes Científiques de la University of Barcelona (University of Barcelona)Same topicCrime, Illicit Activities, and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207