Bibliographic record
Abstract
For media scholars, locating the old in the new helps to debunk the inflation around the “newness” of contemporary media. Several approaches have been put to work in the exploration of these multiple temporalities within media: remediation, media revival, residual media, media archeology. In this article, we explore another temporal concept—hysteresis—as a way to think through the folding of time within and across media. The first part of the article presents a theoretical overview of the concept of hysteresis, from the field of experimental sciences in the late nineteenth century to Marx, Bourdieu, Baudrillard and others in the social sciences. In the second part, we introduce the concept of “media hysteresis” and illustrate it with two examples: the design of the keypad by Bell System’s push-button phones and the QWERTY keyboard. In the third and final part, we weave the concept of media hysteresis through a discussion of some of the major changes in cinema. More specifically, we examine how the aesthetic of the analogue persists in digital media and how media hysteresis can be useful to apprehend the celluloid revival. Our main argument throughout the article is the need for a theory of asynchronous simultaneity to analyse persistence and continuity across technological changes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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; 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".