Bibliographic record
Abstract
674 SCIENCE FICTION STUDIES, VOLUME 46 (2019) WORKS CITED “City Desk.” Science Fiction Weekly (14 Apr. 1940): 4. Donawerth, Jane. “Science Fiction by Women in the Early Pulps 1926-1930.” Utopian and Science Fiction by Women: Worlds of Difference. Ed. Jane L. Donawerth and Carol Kolmerten. Syracuse: Syracuse UP, 1994. 137-52. ))))) and Carol Kolmerten. “Introduction. ” Utopian and Science Fiction by Women: Worlds of Difference. Ed. Jane L. Donawerth and Carol Kolmerten. Syracuse: Syracuse UP, 1994. 1-14. “Fan Pseudonyms.” Golden Atom (May 1940): 13-14. “F.E. Hardart Types.” Spaceways (Oct. 1940): 22. “F.E. Hardart Writes.” Science Fiction Weekly (12 May 1940): 3. Guenther, Ernst. The Essential Oils. Vol. 6: Individual Essential Oils of the Plant Families. Toronto : Van Nostrand, 1952. Hall, Hal W. Sam Moskowitz: A Bibliography and a Guide. College Station, TX, 2017. Online. Hardart, F.E. “The August Number.” Science Fiction (Dec. 1939): 103. ))))). “The Beast in Space.” Comet (Jul. 1941): 82-89. ))))). “Dear Editor.” Strange Stories (June 1939): 124. ))))). “The Devil’s Pocket.” Astonishing Stories (June 1940): 35-43. ))))). “Early Science Fiction Stories.” Spaceways (Mar. 1940): 15. ))))). “The Hypnohorse.” Spaceways (Sep. 1940): 8-10. ))))). “Likes Human Interest.” Future Fiction (Jul. 1940): 66-67. ))))). “Oil from Birches.” Nature Magazine: An Illustrated Monthly with Popular Articles about Nature. 34.10 (Dec. 1941): 553-54, 578. ))))). “Why Amazing Leads.” Amazing Stories (Jan. 1940): 139. Lefanu, Sarah. In the Chinks of the World Machine: Feminism and Science Fiction. London: Women’s Press, 1988. Moskowitz, Sam. “The World Science Fiction Convention.” New Fandom 1.6 (Jul. 1939): 4-10. Santa Clara Conference. “The Social Responsibility of Engineers.” Technology and Culture 11.2 (1970): 241. Villiani, Jim. “The Woman Science Fiction Writer and the Non-Heroic Male Protagonist.” Patterns of the Fantastic. Ed. Donald M. Hassler. Mercer Island, WA: Starmont, 1983. 21-30. Yaszek, Lisa, and Patrick B. Sharp. “Introduction: New Work for New Women.” Sisters of Tomorrow: The First Women of Science Fiction. Ed. Lisa Yaszek and Patrick B. Sharp. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan UP, 2016. vii-xxv. Moonbit: Poetry from Apollo 11’s Computer Code. Moonbit, by James Dodson and Rena Mosteirin, is a work of experimental poetry and prose based on the computer code used to direct Apollo 11 to the moon on 20 July 1969. A full account can be found in the July issue of the Dartmouth News. Punctum Books, the publisher, describes the work as a hybrid work comprised of experimental poetry and a critical theory of the poetics and politics of computer code. It offers an extended intellectual and creative engagement with the affordances of computer software through multiple readings and rewritings of a singular text, the source code of the Apollo 11 Guidance Computer or the ‘AGC.’ Moonbit remarks and remixes the code that 675 NOTES AND CORRESPONDENCE made space travel possible. Half of the work is erasure poetry that uses the AGC code as the source text, building on the premise that code can speak beyond its functional purpose. Dobson and Mosteirin have taken their title from an onboard toggle switch—called a moonbit—that allowed the Apollo astronauts to alternate their representation of space. One position put the Earth at the center of the universe; the other placed the moon in that central spot. A print and online version of Moonbit is available from Punctum, an independent open-access publisher. Says Dobson, “Moonbit will not get you to the moon, but seeks to reclaim the text that did this, as a site for artistic exploration.”—Charlotte Albright, Dartmouth Magazine 2018 Science Fiction Research Association Awards. At the annual conference in June 2019, the 2018 SFRA Awards were presented. The winner of the Pilgrim Award for lifetime contributions to sf and fantasy scholarship was John Rieder, and Sherryl Vint received the Thomas D. Clareson award for distinguished service. For the best critical essay-length work of the year, Jed Mayer received the Pioneer Award for “The Weird Ecologies of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein,” SFS 45.2 (2018): 229-43. The Student Paper Award went to Grant Dempsey for “‘Did they tell you I can Floak?’: Living Between Always and Sometimes in China Miéville’s Embassytown.” The Mary Kay Bray award for...
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.182 | 0.064 |
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".