Experimenting with creativity, immigration, language, power, and technology: a research agencement
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This paper is the actualization of a researcher’s attempt to engage, both conceptually and methodologically, with the dynamic and ever-creative connections and forces associated with the schooling experiences of immigrant students. The research reported that in this paper comprises part of a three-year research project funded by Canada’s Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council and focuses on the interrelationships between immigration, technology and pop culture in a Canadian French-language secondary school. The paper aims to discuss this issue. Design/methodology/approach Drawing from new materialist thought, the experience of one immigrant student is put to work with(in) the Deleuzo–Guattarian concepts of agencement, machines, language and power ( pouvoir , puissance ) with(in) the rhizoanalysis of a short video clip provided by the student. Findings With(in) the rhizoanalysis, the publication machine emerges as a force that could potentially affect the expression of one’s becoming citizen, and hacking emerges as a force that could contribute to the destabilization of the publication machine’s power ( pouvoir ). Originality/value The originality of this paper is that readers are also invited to contribute to this experimentation in contact with the real.
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 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 | 0.042 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it