MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3043625719 · doi:10.18192/cjcs.vi7.4633

Thinking (America) After Cavell

2020· article· en· W3043625719 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Alonso Gamarra

Bibliographic record

VenueConversations The Journal of Cavellian Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicWittgensteinian philosophy and applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReading (process)WishBit (key)Visual artsArt historyHistoryArtSociologyLiteraturePhilosophyLinguisticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I read Stanley Cavell’s This New Yet Unapproachable America for the first time over a two-day bus ride from Montreal to Chicago. This happened a little bit more than a year ago, in March 2018, when I came back to the US, where I grew up undocumented.The following essay tries to respond to that reading from both a deep attachment to Cavell’s writing and a wish to learn how to think after his picture of American thinking. Alternatively, I can also say that this essay is an attempt at sitting with an irresolvable pull between the unapproachability of things, and the need of confronting the world with itself along the lines in which it meets in a series of topics and a place.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.854
Threshold uncertainty score0.389

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.084
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConversations The Journal of Cavellian StudiesSame topicWittgensteinian philosophy and applicationsFrench-language works237,207