Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract | Visual media played a crucial role on nearly all levels of everyday private and public life in the GDR. This essay intends to readjust the focus on GDR visual history by investigating its margins, including ephemeral and semi-official film archives beyond the “official” state-controlled production of images. It does not reexamine such ephemeral cinematic remnants as historical sources but rather as traces that have to be understood in context and appropriated, arranged, and re-read, assembling them as fragments of the past. The specific focus here is on the works of Thomas Heise, a filmmaker who—although prohibited from producing and publicly releasing films during the existence of the GDR—managed to create during that time various audio and visual artifacts as contributions to archives for the future. Résumé | En la RDA les médias visuels ont joué un rôle crucial dans presque tous les domaines de la vie quotidienne, qu’elle soit privée ou publique. Cet essai a pour but de réajuster le focus sur l’histoire visuelle de la RDA en examinant ses marges, en incluant les archives éphémères et semi-officielles au-delà de la production “officielle” d’images. Cet essai ne réexamine pas ces vestiges cinématographiques éphémères en tant que sources historiques, mais comme des traces devant être comprises dans un certain contexte, approprié, arrangé et re-lu. Cette discussion sur les traces cinématographiques éphémères ainsi que les techniques d’assemblage de fragments du passé explore l’oeuvre de Thomas Heise, un réalisateur unique dans son genre qui – bien qu’il soit interdit de produire et de mettre en circulation publiquement des films sous le régime de la RDA – a créé pendant ce temps des artefacts audios et visuels comme contributions aux archives pour l’avenir.
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 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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".