MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994640924 · doi:10.22230/cjc.2019v44n4a3715

Reading over McLuhan’s Shoulder

2019· article· en· W2994640924 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
John Durham Peters

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Communication · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMedia, Communication, and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesModernityReading (process)ArtArt historySociologyPhilosophyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background This article1 presents a reworked keynote address given at the “Many McLuhans” conference held at the University of Toronto in September 2018 on the occasion of UNESCO recognizing Marshall McLuhan’s library as part of its Memory of the World program.Analysis The article explores McLuhan as a reader and suggests that his greatest work might have been what he read rather than what he wrote. Conclusion and implications The library, as a genre, is one of the great media forms of modernity and antiquity and a marker of the fragility and majesty of the things that humans do with their large brains. Contexte Cet article consiste en la révision d’un discours principal donné au colloque « Many McLuhans » tenu en septembre 2018 à l’Université de Toronto, à l’occasion de la reconnaissance de la bibliothèque de Marshall McLuhan par l’UNESCO dans le contexte de son programme Mémoire du monde.Analyse L’article explore McLuhan en tant que lecteur et suggère que sa plus grande œuvre consiste en ce qu’il a lu plutôt qu’en ce qu’il a écrit.Conclusions et implications La bibliothèque, en tant que genre, est une des grandes formes médiatiques de l’Antiquité et de la modernité et une instance de la fragilité et de la majesté de ce que font les humains avec leurs grands cerveaux.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.817
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.011
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0430.004

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.299 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations20
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of CommunicationSame topicMedia, Communication, and EducationFrench-language works237,207