MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311683730 · doi:10.2478/bsmr-2022-0016

Can We <i>Really</i> Have Nice Things? Preparing for the Metaverse

2022· article· en· W4311683730 on OpenAlexaff
Georgia Gaden Jones, Delia Dumitrica

Bibliographic record

VenueBaltic screen media review./Baltic screen media review · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations
Canadian institutionsSAIT Polytechnic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisionMetaverseCreativityZoomNarrativeEnablingPromotion (chess)SociologyComputer scienceAestheticsEpistemologyVirtual realityPolitical sciencePsychologyHuman–computer interactionSocial psychologyPoliticsLawPhilosophyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Drawing from our previous experience of the virtual world Second Life, we engage in a critical reading of the hype and promotion of the Metaverse in Mark Zuckerberg’s 2021 Keynote Presentation (Meta 2021). We zoom in on the visions of the reality and of the future that big tech leaders promise to legitimize themselves as not only economically but socially and morally valuable. Presented with the help of three broad themes – connection, experiences, and creativity – the promises of a better future articulated in the descriptions and visions of the Metaverse are anchored in a deterministic narrative of technology as an enabler of individual choice and freedom. In this way, the commercial intent behind the world-building actions of a mighty economic actor becomes reframed as merely an expression of users own needs and dreams of a better future.

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 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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.052
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, 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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.393
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.052
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBaltic screen media review./Baltic screen media reviewSame topicNeuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical InnovationsFrench-language works237,207