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
Hannah Arendt’s work is gaining increasing recognition in educational administration. But less has been written about her as an educator, colleague, and provocateur. Here, I explore the lasting impressions that Arendt had on former students, colleagues, and friends. This exploration is conducted through the lens of Arendtian narrative inquiry. For Arendt, narrative is fundamental to understanding lived experience, not least because stories provide us with a deeper understanding of an individual. She maintains, however, that it is the spectator, not the actor, who is better able to assess the ‘who’ of a person. Because each spectator has a particular viewpoint, I include diverse recollections that gathered together, create a silhouette of the ‘who’ of Hannah Arendt. I use the term ‘silhouette,’ purposefully, since this is not an in-depth portrait. Rather, it is an impressionistic account of the lasting effects she made on others. These lasting impressions serve to reaffirm Arendt’s belief in the value of storytelling as a powerful means of understanding.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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