MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4304630579 · doi:10.1177/17504813221123847

The voice of the work to be made: Abductive communication and creativity

2022· article· en· W4304630579 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDiscourse & Communication · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiscourse Analysis in Language Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreativityPragmatismUnificationPerspective (graphical)EpistemologySociologyProcess (computing)Mechanism (biology)Creative workAestheticsCognitive scienceComputer sciencePsychologySocial psychologyVisual artsPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While artists often present their works as communicating to and through them, this idea has rarely been taken seriously, nor empirically studied from a communicational perspective. Building upon the pragmatist tradition, we show how this particular form of communication takes place. Using Peirce’s concept of abduction, we argue that a creative process essentially happens when a resonance between two materials leads to the unification of these materials into a new whole. Drawing upon a case study, we show how we can retrace such resonances by paying close attention to the interactions between participants collectively involved in a creative project. This paper makes an important contribution to communication studies by revealing the communicational mechanism of our creative impulsions. It also opens new avenues for the study of artistic endeavors as well as other creative activities such as science, politics, or design.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.714
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.270 · 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