Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phenomenology, peekaboo, and play are notions that may not tempt the reader to take a paper very seriously. Phenomenology is a philosophical form of qualitative research that is guided more often by the fortuitous serendipity of contemplative insights than by the rationality of reproducible social science procedures. Peekaboo is an infant game of the eyes that hardly seems worth addressing in a self-respectful research journal, and the topic of play is equally suspect to scientists for whom the cheerful idleness of play is the opposite of the seriousness and purposiveness of work or labor. However, here I will propose that (a) peekaboo may give us inceptual insights into the phenomenon of eye contact; (b) idle play is not just a counter concept of seriousness and work, but a phenomenon in its own right; (3) phenomenology is a serendipitous form of research that is philosophic and may give us compelling insights into the lived meanings of quotidian experiences in our lives, and (d) the mythological figure of Kairos speaks to the enigma of our humanness and provides an understanding of time as the discontinuous instant of the now and of the phenomenological method as intuitive grasping of meaning. Phenomenological writing is rarely easy and yet it can be highly satisfying in its results. I aim to show that meaningful insights are gained through a patient and attentively alert surrender to Kairos time and serendipitous moments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.045 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".