MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3165088971 · doi:10.26881/sf.2020.16.04

Śmierć autora i jego żywoty

2021· article· en· W3165088971 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSchulz/Forum · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPolish-Jewish Holocaust Memory Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpectacleRomanceLiteratureAmbiguityIllusionKey (lock)HistoryPhilosophyArtLinguisticsPsychologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Writers’ biographies (written about writers by writers) constitute a genre with very long historical roots, which has flourished in the last twenty-five or thirty years. This is undoubtedly linked to the lifting of the post-structuralist ban concerning the author as a person, so that it became possible, at least in France, to legitimize biographical writing again. We date this revival to the mid-1980s, when Duras, Robbe-Grillet and Sollers all published (auto)biographical texts, whose status is certainly problematic, but nonetheless worthy of careful attention. Immersed in Romantic anthropology, in various transpositions and numerous genre nostalgias, this general ambiguity appears as the key characteristic of biographical productions of the 1980s. What we have here is a kind of a spectacle, in which the figure of the author re-enters the stage. At the same time, it is a “biographical illusion” (Bourdieu). Many contemporary biographers know that the ‘truth’ about the other can only be grasped through a play on forms (or on the memory of forms), if not, to evoke Lacan, in “a line of fiction”.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.721
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.209 · 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