TESTING THE LIMITS: WHAT HAPPENS WHEN DIGITAL HUMANITIES MEETS ALTERNATIVE WORLDVIEWS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
“Testing the Limits” aims to introduce a conceptual paradigm shift in theoretical approaches to the use of immersive technologies in a postcolonial, post-positivistic world. This means bringing into proximity alternative explanatory models of “reality”--such as quantum theory, the Indigenous philosophy of Leroy Little Bear, and the theory of synchronicity as developed by Carl G. Jung in collaboration with physicist Wolfgang Pauli--where these modes open into alternative worldviews which offer a rapprochement in the history of consciousness between science and art. This study, therefore, focuses on the instrumentality of theory itself in constructing perceptual models of reality (including scientific and artistic worldviews), especially where it is “virtual” and where it needs consider diverse philosophies, scientific theories and representations of space/time in relation to subjectivity. To illustrate this claim, the media work by Canadian artist, Char Davies will be offered as a case studies. Char Davies is a software developer and artist whose work is informed by her understanding of quantum theory.
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 | 0.024 | 0.098 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.063 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.030 | 0.070 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.019 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".