MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205163545 · doi:10.4000/belphegor.4280

Weinstock, Jeffrey Andrew. The Monster Theory Reader. Capturer l’image changeante d’une altérité en perpétuelle reconfiguration

2021· article· fr· W4205163545 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Théodore Dehgan

Bibliographic record

VenueBelphégor · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFolklore, Mythology, and Literature Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonsterPhilosophyControl reconfigurationPhysicsPsychologyPsychoanalysisMathematical physicsComputer scienceQuantum mechanicsEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L'ouvrage The Monster Theory Reader, supervis par Jeffrey Andrew Weinstock, dploie les enjeux et thmatiques qui traversent la notion de monstruosit travers vingtquatre articles compils dans quatre parties thmatiques. La "thorie du monstre", tablie sous ce nom par Jeffrey Jerome Cohen, est dfinie par Weinstock comme un champ d'investigation auquel peuvent se rallier des chercheurs de domaines varis. 2 Ces diffrents domaines sont mis en lien thmatiquement dans l'ouvrage. La premire partie offre une bote outils thorique pour les tudes de monstres (Monster Theory Toolbox), en proposant des textes de Sigmund Freud, Masashiro Mori et Julia Kristeva. Et l'ouvrage se clt sur une quatrime partie, The Promises of the Monster (Les Promesses du Monstre), prsentant une srie de recadrages pistmologiques qui nous incitent embrasser la figure du monstre comme une chappatoire aux normes tablies (avec des textes d'Anthony Lioi, Donna Haraway et Patricia MacCormack). Ces articles qui ouvrent et ferment le recueil se distinguent des autres par leur volont de faire du concept du monstre un absolu susceptible d'tre dracin. Les articles rpartis dans les sections Monsterizing Difference (rendre la diffrence monstrueuse) et Monsters and Cultures (Monstres et Cultures) inscrivent quant eux chaque fois leurs monstres dans

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.702
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBelphégorSame topicFolklore, Mythology, and Literature StudiesFrench-language works237,207