MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2471693192 · doi:10.1057/9781137453082_8

Flickering, Spilling and Diffusing Body/Knowledge in the Posthuman Early Years

2016· book-chapter· en· W2471693192 on OpenAlex
Rachel Holmes, Liz Jones

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · 2016
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPosthumanist Ethics and Activism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe ImaginaryAestheticsSubject (documents)SociologyArtEpistemologyArt historyPhilosophyPsychoanalysisPsychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following Deleuze and Whitehead, we begin with a movement from without, a process, never with a ‘subject’ of a process. This page merely opens onto what Manning and Massumi describe as ‘a commotion of relational activity, each vying to be written down, to be the conduit of the field’s summing up in a determinate expression’ (2014, p. 12): Texts are traversed by a movement that comes from without, that does not begin on the page (nor the preceding pages), that is not bounded by the frame of the book; it is entirely different from the imaginary movement of representation or the abstract movement of concepts that habitually take place among words and within the mind of the reader. (Deleuze, cited in Blondel, 1985, p. 145) Amid this commotion, the moment of beginning our chapter is defined by what our senses are compelled to attend to (Mukhopadhyay, 2008). Yet even before our pen and paper begin to seduce each other in virtual intimacy, relational activity is already at work across heterogeneous fields of experience: the echoes of an invitation to write; our calling to familiar systems of linguistic symbols; collaborating in the imaginary of the emerging book; awkward relations with deforestation; seductive ecologies of preceding chapters; the ebb and flow across French, Canadian, Italian and American theorists; the shifting terrain and traditions of philosophy; the politics of the printing press and technology; the nourishing workings of the dorsal aorta and a multiplicity of intensely vibrating senses.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.290
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