Bibliographic record
Abstract
A NEW FRONTIER FOR VISUAL CULTURE: THOUGHTS ON THE PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION OF DIGITAL DEEP-SEA IMAGERY The following discussion is a response to the proliferation of digital deep-sea imagery that has been emerging since the mid-1990s. Here, digital imagery is understood in William J. Mitchell's (1994, 7) postmodern social and cultural terms as "a medium that privileges fragmentation, indeterminacy, and heterogeneity and that emphasizes process or performance", and an "opportunity to expose the aporias of photography's construction of the visual world". A stock of visual documentation (still and moving images) is growing each day - widely available on the internet, in books (both for adults and for children), and in movie theatres internationally. IntroductionMindful of this new entertaining and educational material, it strikes me as problematic that there is a paucity of critical inquiry into the curatorial and signifying practices associated with its dissemination, certainly in terms of...
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.058 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.024 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".