MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4232685476 · doi:10.22215/etd/2014-10585

Your Effort to Remain What You Are is What Limits You: Transhumanism in the Films of Mamoru Oshii

2014· dissertation· en· W4232685476 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew Poulter

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranshumanismSubject (documents)PoliticsAllegorySubject matterStyle (visual arts)SociologyEpistemologyAestheticsPolitical scienceComputer scienceArtPhilosophyVisual artsLiteratureLawWorld Wide WebPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this graduate thesis is to analyze the animated films of director Mamoru Oshii in order to examine the director's use of the concept of transhumanism (the belief that the human race can evolve beyond its current physical and mental limitations, especially by means of science and technology) and how it informs both the subject matter of his films, as well as the director's own signature directorial style and themes.The goal is to demonstrate that all of his films are informed in some way by an analysis of the transhuman, though the difference between them is that some analyze the subject from a cynical angle, others tackle the subject directly in a more optimistic and speculative fashion, while others still use it as an allegory for the director's own political and social views.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.088
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNeuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical InnovationsFrench-language works237,207