MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366179310 · doi:10.1515/9783110788044-001

Endorsement

2023· book-chapter· en· W4366179310 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Katrin Antweiler

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMemory, Trauma, and Commemoration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

sb ook offers its readers an ew set of concepts and empirical studies that deepen and challengethe established understandings about politics of Holocaust remembrance. Braidingtogether questions of public narrativization and historical emplotment of the Holocaust,the international human rights project and the imperative of contemporary museums to educatea nd raise awareness, Memorialising the Holocaust in Human Rights Museums shows with admirable deftness that museums, no less than prisons, clinics, or laboratories,a re sites of discursiveo perations of power,d iscipline, and docile embodiment. While Antweiler skilfullynavigates the empirical field of debates,exhibitions, installations, artefacts, and ideas found in threem useums of Holocaust remembrance in Germany, Canada,a nd South Africa, she alson eedst ob ec redited with paying careful attention to whati sn ot seen-to discursive inconsistencies and omissions she encountered duringh er fieldwork, to mnemonic myopias and exclusions, to tacit interests and agendas, as well as to power relations and structures of domination that remain hiddenf rom view.I ne ffect,t he book masterfullyc ritiques the presumed reparative effects of contemporary curatorial practices and acts of 'puttingm emory on display'-acts that Antweiler aptlyd ubs 'exhibitionary atonement'-and thus stipulatesa ni mportant reflection about the political frameworks of visibilityinr elation to the broader narrativeso fr edress for historical wrongdoing.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.660
Threshold uncertainty score0.956

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0580.044

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.240 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMemory, Trauma, and CommemorationFrench-language works237,207