MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2333679859 · doi:10.1386/pop.2.2.315_1

Index marks the spot? The photo-diagram's referential system

2012· article· en· W2333679859 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilosophy of Photography · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhotography and Visual Culture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndexicalitySalientIndex (typography)DiagramPhotographyJunctureIconicityHistoryVisual artsArtComputer scienceLinguisticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores the genealogy of a paradox in the evidentiary logic of the press photograph. While such photographs are supposed to gain their special authority from their unmediated relationship to the events they represent, they are often illegible without supplementary graphical material. The picture press of the 1920s and 1930s, saturated with re-creations of brutal crimes and messy accidents, fashioned an elaborate system of arrows, daggers, circles and crosses added by hand in paint or ink to help guide the viewer's attention to the salient detail. Examining the hybrid idiom of the photo-diagram, this article investigates how photography's indexicality and its multiplicity seek reconciliation at this revealing juncture in media history, and explores the ramifications for the evidentiary status of the press photograph in the digital era.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.901
Threshold uncertainty score0.806

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.201 · 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