MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2560819669 · doi:10.3138/utq.85.4.109

Public Humanities in the Age of the Ideas Industry and the Rise of the Creatives

2016· article· en· W2560819669 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jonathan Elmer

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Toronto Quarterly · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicKierkegaardian Philosophy and Influence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrope (literature)DramaturgyCreativityEmbodied cognitionAppealAestheticsSpace (punctuation)HumanitiesSociologyArtLiteratureEpistemologyPhilosophyPolitical scienceLawLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our world is post-auratic in Walter Benjamin's sense, but that does not mean that the humanities are left without a task. The world that Benjamin described as a world of play also affords opportunities. Humanities competes in this space with new dramaturgy of ideas (see: TED talks), and with design as a master trope for creativity. But the enduring appeal of embodied experience, typified by festivals, indicates that there is still room for the complex and unpredictable diffusion of ideas.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.171

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0230.062
Scholarly communication0.0300.015
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.002

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.156 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Toronto QuarterlySame topicKierkegaardian Philosophy and InfluenceFrench-language works237,207