MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309377456 · doi:10.1163/15685152-03050006

Response: The Blur of Letters, the Residue of Reception

2022· article· en· W4309377456 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

VenueBiblical Interpretation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicRhetoric and Communication Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocialityConversationPerceptionMeaning (existential)Biblical studiesAestheticsAffect (linguistics)PsychologyEpistemologyLiteratureArtCommunicationPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This short piece offers a reflection, in light of the papers preceding it, on how we might engage some of the epistemological provocations associated with affect to reconceptualize letters and “reception” (the receiving of letters, the ongoing life of other kinds of texts). Drawing especially from Michal Beth Dinkler’s notion of “epistolary embodiment,” and putting it in conversation with Fred Moten’s description of “blur” in Black sociality and Erin Manning’s (related) understanding of infrathin moments of perception, this piece proposes that semantic meaning is only one part of the way we make sense of letters, and texts at large.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.677
Threshold uncertainty score0.927

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.223 · 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