Bibliographic record
Abstract
Foe is a novel that subverts expectations and builds on a continuous feeling of tension that is never resolved, even at the end of the book. When redesigning the dustjacket, it was essential to take the tension and translate it visually. A particular scene stands out in the novel. Junior flosses his teeth and forcefully brings down the floss on his gums to make himself bleed, and he spits the blood out into the sink. While it may not be the most crucial scene in the novel, it felt personally the most jarring. Junior reveals that he feels alive seeing his blood in the sink. He is living and breathing like a human being. The twist is that he is not a human at all, but this scene disputes that. What makes us human? What makes us alive? Arguably, our lifeblood makes us alive. Visually, the red stands out and is striking. It brings up questions for the viewer: who is bleeding? Why is this the cover? The title, Foe, is slightly faded and blends in with the background of the sink. The enemy could be anywhere or anyone. The floss turns red in the blood, representing the red string of fate from Greek mythology. Junior does not have a choice throughout the events of the novel. He is fated to be replaced and eventually is the replacement. Terrance and Outermore act as the Fates and decide when the string is cut, signifying his death and end. Department: Design Studies Faculty Mentor: Constanza Pacher
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".