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
This piece of creative writing is a single piece from a larger collection of poems that explores different sides of love, with a special focus on longing and waiting, but also tackling darker aspects, such as abuse and rape. Using a mythical background and such figures as Persephone, Eurydice, Orpheus, Psyche and Artemis, the collection aims to convey softness and calm, while also representing empowered feminine voices. The poem is composed of varying stanza forms and rhythms mixed with prose and using motifs and colours that also occur in other poems of the collection to create echoes within the piece. It is also part of a wider artistic project that includes paintings, photographs, a short film and other creations, which all work as so many reverberations and refractions of the poems themselves.The project was partly inspired by H.D.’s poem “Eurydice,” a piece that really made me want to work with myth and to give a voice to women whose perspective is rarely portrayed in literature. At the time, I was also working on my doctoral thesis, especially on contact and touch, and on representations of love in poetry. As I kept working on poetic voice and poetic representations of sensations and breathing, I realised that through writing more poetry, I could also get a different hold of the creative process that still nourishes my thoughts on the relationships between poetry, sensation, empathy and healing.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.077 | 0.002 |
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