MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2808713162 · doi:10.7202/1046984ar

Writing about Writers

2018· article· en· W2808713162 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Stevie Marsden

Bibliographic record

VenueMémoires du livre · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiscourse Analysis in Language Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReputationAcademic writingSection (typography)Field (mathematics)Professional writingCreative writingSociologyLiteratureSocial scienceComputer sciencePedagogyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents a literature review of existing academic, journalistic and non-fiction writing that has furthered the assessment of the writer and the occupation of writing in recent years. It is structured around four prominent themes that research about writers and writing commonly falls under: Being a Writer ; Reputation, Fame and Hierarchies ; Psychoanalyses of the Writer ; and Economies of Writing . The final section of this article, Future Research , will propose research questions and methodological approaches which have, until now, remained largely absent from studies of the writer and writing life, and argues that these new areas of investigation are necessary to continue broadening the field of research about writing and furthering our understanding of the writer’s inspirations, motivations and work practices.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.812
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMémoires du livreSame topicDiscourse Analysis in Language StudiesFrench-language works237,207