Part III - Literary Scholarship and Social Physics: Reading and Writing with Social Physics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The four essays bundled in this article explore intersections of literary research and digital simulation for emerging scholars who participated in our week-long experimental workshop on social physics coding for the VESPACE game. Louise Moulin opens this discussion, drawing on her previous digital work to explore and critique the ways in which literature becomes data, a fundamental interpretive moment that has both technical and epistemological ramifications. This essay is followed by Chiara Azzaretti, who recounts how her apprehension about a first contact with DH turned to fascination with the ways in which digital outputs can enrich scholarly discussions by furnishing a responsive and interactive context for the close reading skills taught in literature PhD programs. Julien Le Goff then details how his work using the Anecdotes dramatiques collection in a coding context revealed the full extent of the challenge of reconciling these brief, sociologically acute stories with a programming framework that requires a level of precision and causality that texts only rarely provide. The last contribution, by Dr. Charlee M. Bezilla, recasts digital humanities work as a variety of translation, situating the literary skills learned working across linguistic traditions as a vital preparation for understanding meaning-making, for digital products as much as for works of literature. [This article is part of the collection Computer Modelling and Simulation for Literary-Historical Research: VESPACE and Social Physics.]Les quatre essais regroupés dans cet article explorent les intersections de la recherche littéraire et de la simulation numérique pour les chercheurs émergeants qui ont participé à notre atelier expérimental d’une semaine sur le codage en physique sociale pour le jeu VESPACE. Louise Moulin ouvre cette discussion en réfléchissant sur son travail numérique précédent pour explorer et critiquer les moyens par lesquels la littérature se transforme en donnée informatique, un moment d’interprétation fondamentale avec d’importantes conséquences techniques et épistémologiques. S’ensuit l’essai de Chiara Azzaretti, qui raconte comment son appréhension d’un premier contact avec les humanités numériques s’est transformée en fascination pour les façons dont les rendus numériques peuvent enrichir les discussions savantes en fournissant un contexte réactif et interactif pour exercer les techniques de lecture approfondie enseignées dans les programmes de doctorat en littérature. Julien Le Goff détaille ensuite comment son travail autour des Anecdotes dramatiques dans un contexte de codage a révélé toute l’étendue du défi de réconcilier ces brèves histoires sociologiquement aiguës avec un cadre de programmation qui exige un niveau de précision et causalité que les objets textuels ne fournissent que rarement. La dernière contribution, de Dr. Charlee M. Bezilla, positionne le travail en humanités numériques comme une variété de traduction, situant les compétences littéraires acquises en travaillant à travers de multiples traditions linguistiques comme une préparation essentielle à la compréhension de la fabrication du sens, autant pour les produits numériques que pour les œuvres littéraires. [Cet article fait partie de la collection Modélisation et simulation informatiques pour la recherche littéraire-historique : VESPACE et physique sociale.]
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".