MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4250255799 · doi:10.11647/obp.0213.04

4. Kitting the Digital Humanities for the Anthropocene

2021· book-chapter· en· W4250255799 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Book Publishers · 2021
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographies of human-animal interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsAnthropoceneDigital humanitiesIntervention (counseling)Field (mathematics)Work (physics)HumanitiesEnvironmental ethicsEngineeringArtPhilosophyPsychologyMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As our landscapes of digital stuff continue to expand and connect, it is imperative we devise a toolkit for thinking (and doing) that tends to the environmental pulses of our digital condition. It is time now, if it isn’t already too late, to enact a spongier digital-material-humanities form of knowledge-production that is tailored to the concerns of our emerging Anthropocenic humanities and that absorbs the full force of our interconnections. A deliberate environmental intervention is not only an obvious response but also an opening: it plants our field securely within the earth, opens us to seeing our tools as environmental artifacts, and urges us to use our talents for doing earth work.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.397
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0230.005
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.259 · 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