Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper highlights the distortive nature of narrative models that are often employed in video game historiographies to produce captivating tales. More precisely, it argues against: the search for video games’ origin(s); the “chronological-teleological” model based on linear progressions; the “chronological-organic” narrative revolving around a biological-like evolution; the “epistemic breaks” structure based on radical transformations; the “bi-polar” model involving a dialectic of oppositions; and the “cyclical” narrative revolving around postmodern tropes of return, recycling, and retrofitting. In addition to explaining why the uncritical use of these emplotment techniques is problematic, this paper argues in favor of a Foucault-inspired genealogical approach which avoids the quest for the media’s origin(s) and articulates video game history around coexistence, overlaps, interferences, synergies, networks of influences, and discontinuities. This genealogical method also restores the missing inventors, devices, and games in historical records while highlighting the power relations that led to their omission in the first 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".