MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2341782061

Necropolitical Assemblages and Cross-Border Ethics in Hiromi Goto’s Darkest Light

2016· article· en· W2341782061 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian literature · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPosthumanist Ethics and Activism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultitudeAssemblage (archaeology)PoliticsAffect (linguistics)SociologyCurrencyField (mathematics)AestheticsPolitical scienceHistoryLawArtPhilosophyArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drawing on Deleuzian-inflected theories of assemblage, together with recent interventions in the field of affect studies, this article examines Hiromi Goto’s novel Darkest Light (2012) in terms of what I refer to as a multitude of necropolitical assemblages . Depicted as deviant and monstrous, the human and non-human beings portrayed in the novel are often deprived of political rights and thus forced to live and die in the social, economic, and cultural borderlands of our public world. The dispersion of temporal, spatial, and other material borders in Darkest Light , however, signals how these vulnerable populations, despite being stripped of biopolitical currency, are capable of activating change. In this essay, I argue that Goto’s novel proposes a cross-border ethic as a strategy to counteract those necropolitical assemblages that govern contemporary societies, while simultaneously advocating for alternative logics of embodiment, affect, and ethical intervention.

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)0.001
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 score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.947

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.376 · 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