Manifesting Stories: The Progression of Comics from Print to Web to Print
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Publishing comics via the Internet is a growing practice among creative individuals who desire artistic and personal autonomy, and also wish to share a diverse range of stories. These webcomics have expanded the creative boundaries of storytelling with the digital medium. Additionally, publishing on the Internet offers the possibility to engage with markets that print comic books have ignored (particularly stories about minorities, stories which contain explicit or crude content, and stories with character designs deemed 'unattractive' and therefore unmarketable). Despite these opportunities the Internet presents, webcomics have returned to print culture as webcomic creators seek to print their webcomics. Though these printed webcomics may be expensive, and the same content is available online for free, fans choose to help them print these comics through a practice called crowdfunding. Webcomics were initially considered a spinoff from traditional comic books, but I argue that webcomics’ return to the print medium has provided a new perspective on the sale of printed comics as well as the interaction between comics creators and their fans.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".