MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2477287137 · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139939799.029

The machines that write us: Social media and the evolution of the autobiographical impulse

2016· book-chapter· en· W2477287137 on OpenAlexaff
Andreas Kitzmann

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2016
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicNarrative Theory and Analysis
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanityImpulse (physics)AestheticsPsychologyLiteratureSociologyHistoryArtPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Among those interested in the study of autobiography, it has become a truism, or perhaps even a cliché, to state that the need to tell one's own story is a universal one, at least on this planet. The form and nature of this story is of course up for debate given the myriad ways in which humanity has represented individual experience over the course of millennia. Indeed, the very term ‘story’ should be framed by very large quotation marks given its associations with linearity and the primacy given to the individualised narrator. One person's ‘story’ could very well be another's random scribble, just as anonymous mutterings and whispers passed from one generation to the next can evolve into complex narrations of personal and collective experience. Technically, of course, the term autobiography is not only historically contingent but also frequently employed as an arguably ahistorical representative of the ‘structure of feeling’ associated with the Enlightenment and modern condition. This is particularly the case of the archetypical Renaissance ‘man’ that privileges the self-possessed individual who literally thinks him or herself into a state of being. Descartes is an obvious representative figure, notably in terms of being the figurehead for the enlightened mind and what is eventually to become the modern sensibility. Reaching back even further in time is the elevation of St. Augustine, who is granted a kind of ‘proto-modern’ status by being associated with the very first rumblings of what we now know as the literary genre of autobiography. ‘Augustine’, writes Arthur Kroker, ‘might rightly be described as the first citizen of the modern world’ whose Confessions function as a kind of founding exemplar of ‘directly apprehended experience of the direct deliverance of will, nature and consciousness’ (Kroker and Cook 1986, 37). James Olney follows suit by writing that ‘the entire justification, validation, necessity, and indeed exemplary instance of writing one's life, of finding the words that signify the self and its history, are offered to us for the first time … in the Confessions ’ (Olney 1998, 2). While we can certainly debate such claims, what is important to note here is not who was the world's first autobiographer but rather what such claims reveal about perceptions of change and departure.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.019
Scholarly communication0.0150.012
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.161 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicNarrative Theory and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207