Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article examines contemporary biometric science against the backdrop of its development in nineteenth century eugenic and biostatistical practices, most notably the composite photography of Francis Galton. Focusing on automated face recognition, the article argues that contemorary biometric science is inextricable from its aesthetic investments, which in turn shape the ways in which faces and bodies are differentiated in identification systems. Based on a close reading of biometric engineering texts and projects, this aesthetico-scientific approach offers new ways of conceptualizing how biometrics constitutes rather than merely reflects bodies, and encodes racist, misogynist, and other social logics into the conception and design of technologies themselves. These are not biases that can be corrected, as ostensibly progressive biometric projects like IBM’s Diversity in Faces initiative suggest, but rather are inextricable from the biometric desire to render faces and bodies as transparent and machine-readable.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 it