Emergence and ontogenetics: Towards a communication without agent
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 scientific community, discussions about emergence are motivated by a need to understand the process by which complex systems exhibit novel characteristics that cannot be reduced to those of their parts. The whole is thus said to be greater than the sum of the parts. We borrow from this framework in order to explore a different understanding of communication. Instead of seeing the whole as the result of a communication process between the parts, we take a step back and propose to understand communication as the process through which both parts and whole emerge. This perspective opens the possibility to think of a communication that is not the result of an exchange between pre-existing individual agents, but the very process by which individuals emerge in the first place. From the perspective of social sciences in general, and of communication studies in particular, this theoretical experimentation points towards a model that is not subordinated to the traditional opposition between parts and wholes, individuals and collectives.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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