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
This article argues that the National 9/11 Museum blurs the lines between first hand experience and the experiences of visitors who come to participate in a shared encounter of public mourning and non-stop documentation. All visitors to the museum are invited to contribute to its testimonial archive in two prominent ways: by preserving their own “9/11 story” in a recording booth or by composing a message in a digital guestbook that is subsequently projected against the slurry wall as part of the permanent exhibit. By encouraging visitors to “Join the Conversation,” the museum frames 9/11 less as a specific event or date circumscribed by geographical spaces and more as an unending process of subjectification, in which the category of “witness” is constituted through acts of virtual exchange without much regard to an individual's proximity to the event. Bearing witness is unbounded in time and constituted though the circulation of affects, in which the feeling of what it is like to claim the status of witness emerges as a privileged figuration of historical trauma—yet one which remains mediated by state power in unexamined ways.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 it