With (violent) love: Seeing mental images getting lost and resurface
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Concepts fundamental to our (personal) systems of belief and behaviour are crumbling and falling to dust — just because we truly exit our comfort zone. These lost ideas then do transform and, after being newly informed, become as such unfamiliar but promisingly altered concepts. In our correspondence we want to acknowledge the following: that what is getting overwritten through communal and multi-perspective experience is always more promising (not yet better!) than what vanished the moment when it mismatched (our individual) ideas and lost its capacity of sense-making. Our conversation is a plea for considering mental images as going through a process of “getting born,” consolidating, dominating, corrupting and eventually losing any (convincing) agency altogether. Such a consideration is never free of devastating frustration, deep disappointment and the possible darkness of depression darkness of depression but has the power of freeing us up — moreover — freeing us from previously functioning ways of doing and thinking. Those ways might have held something in our place that freakishly doesn’t make sense in other places. We end with a call for not only rethinking and redefining authorship in discussions and on paper but finally act accordingly.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".