MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888813002 · doi:10.3138/seminar.54.3.002

<i>Mitteilung</i>as an Information Concept: Kierkegaard and Benjamin

2018· article· en· W2888813002 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lea Pao

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminar A Journal of Germanic Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCybernetics and Technology in Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommunication sourceMeaning (existential)EpistemologyAppealDialogicConceptual historyAmbivalenceSociologyField (mathematics)PhilosophyPsychologyPsychoanalysisComputer sciencePolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the effects of the history of twentieth-century information technology is to push the meaning of the word Mitteilung into a progressively more technological framework, where it becomes synonymous with the one-way transmission of information from sender to receiver. As a correction to that more recent history, this essay traces the ambivalent structure of Mitteilung through the work of Søren Kierkegaard and Walter Benjamin. Both Kierkegaard and Benjamin, the essay argues, treat Mitteilung (and its Danish equivalent, Meddelelse) as inherently ambiguous, as a socially complex field of sharing, interaction, and exchange. In this way they show, first, that Mitteilung’s conceptual history includes (rather than erases or negates) the oppositional forces between one-way and dialogic communication and, second, that the deep intellectual and social appeal of information extends well beyond its modern theory, technology, or proliferation into its so-called age.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.028
Scholarly communication0.0150.016
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0060.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeminar A Journal of Germanic StudiesSame topicCybernetics and Technology in SocietyFrench-language works237,207