MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885742561 · doi:10.1002/sres.2523

‘Niklas Luhmann before Relational Sociology: The Cybernetics Roots of Systems Theory’

2018· article· en· W2885742561 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSystems Research and Behavioral Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEmbodied and Extended Cognition
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCyberneticsSystems theoryWitnessEpistemologySociologyMeaning (existential)Context (archaeology)Key (lock)MetatheorySocial scienceComputer sciencePhilosophyLawArtificial intelligencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article is meant as an intervention in a special context currently taking shape: in recent years, we have observed the rise of relational sociology and within this paradigm, we can witness the re‐emergence of Niklas Luhmann's systems theory. This is worth mentioning since the latter has been largely neglected by other sociologists until now. This article supports this re‐emergence and, in an effort to make it easier, it explains how Luhmann developed his systems theory by borrowing key elements from the cybernetics movement. These elements revolve around the concept of self‐reference. The article discusses the meaning of self‐reference in light of four figures: self‐regulation, self‐organization, self‐observation and self‐production. © 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.175
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.008
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.180
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.241 · 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