MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2476555016 · doi:10.1007/978-94-6300-316-2_7

Resonance and Aesthetics

2015· book-chapter· en· W2476555016 on OpenAlexaff
Lorri Neilsen Glenn

Bibliographic record

VenueSensePublishers eBooks · 2015
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicKierkegaardian Philosophy and Influence
Canadian institutionsMount Saint Vincent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoetryBricolageBeautyAestheticsArtLiteraturePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rilke’s words say as much about inquiry as they do about poetry and its qualities. What must we bring to inquiry and to poetry to effect change in the world? If resonance, beauty and truth (rarely-used words in the academy) are hallmarks of strong and fine poetry, how can poetic inquiry invite those qualities into our lives and our work? What follows is a bricolage of poetry and prose that, as a poet and scholar, mark in some small way my reflections about resonance and aesthetics. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.038
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.154 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensePublishers eBooksSame topicKierkegaardian Philosophy and InfluenceFrench-language works237,207