MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2561828488 · doi:10.1515/sem-2015-0041

Empiricism within the limits of postmodernism alone: On the emergence of the logically real within the multi-perspectival field

2015· article· en· W2561828488 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Filimowicz

Bibliographic record

VenueSemiotica · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicNarrative Theory and Analysis
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSemioticsEmpiricismSign (mathematics)Object (grammar)EpistemologyField (mathematics)Phenomenology (philosophy)SociologyPostmodernismHumanismPhilosophyAestheticsLinguisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This essay offers a semiotic account of the Logically Real as an emergent category of multi-perspectival experience. Such an approach is supported by phenomenological, developmental, and cognitive discourses, which conceptualize the emergence of object permanence through sensorimotor interactions. Within this frame, I argue that humanities needs a form of native empiricism – by which I mean a discourse of the real, articulated through monosemic practices that symbolize the literal – as a component of the revitalization being wrought by the digital humanities. I adopt Sartre’s concept of the analagon complemented with a notion of codon to explicate what I call the sign dominance of the image, which is explored in relation to the experience of the sign as an act of imagination. Forms of practiced monosemy concatenated around the experienced permanence of objects is offered as a viable humanist discursive strategy toward revivifying empirical methodologies.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.081
Scholarly communication0.0100.014
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSemioticaSame topicNarrative Theory and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207