Bibliographic record
Abstract
Os modelos corporativos vigentes de plataformas digitais, e seus data centers, são formidáveis máquinas de acelerar e controlar fluxos, energias, investimentos e especulações. Esquadrinhamos a natureza diagramática das plataformas – virtual e informe, baseada em forças antitéticas, administrando-servindo vidas em plenas “liberdades de expressão” –, tendo por fundamento os quatro mecanismos de modulação formulados por David Savat: o reconhecimento de padrões, a antecipação de atividades, a organização de antíteses e a programação de fluxos. A partir disso, estabelecemos hipóteses, teses e reflexões acerca do poder das plataformas, de disrupção, de povoamento do tempo e de controles distribuídos, e suas diferentes problemáticas associadas. Isso nos leva a discutir o usuário satisfeito, consignado e resignado, e os limites do uso de termos como manipulação, responsabilidade e privacidade. Sur la diagrammatique des plateformes numériques Les actuels modèles des plateformes numériques, et leurs centres des donnés, sont formidables machines pour accélérer et contrôler les flux, énergies, investissements et spéculations. La présente étude examine la nature de ces plateformes (virtuelles et non formées, fondés sur des forces antithétiques, gérant-servant des vies en pleines «libertés d’expression»), sur la base des quatre mécanismes de modulation formulés par David Savat: reconnaissance de formes, anticipation de activités, organisation des antithèses et programmation des flux. À partir de là, nous établissons des hypothèses, des thèses et des réflexions indispensables sur leur pouvoir des plateformes – la disruption, le reglèment du temps, les contrôles distribués, et leurs différents problèmes associés. Cela nous amène à discuter de l’utilisateur satisfait, consigné et résigné, et des limites de l’utilisation de termes tels que manipulation, responsabilité et privacité. Mots clés: Plateformes Numériques. Diagramme du Pouvoir. Modulation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.006 |
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".