MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386442814 · doi:10.1080/1535685x.2023.2246790

Avant-Garde Literature and the Ground of Rights

2023· article· en· W4386442814 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ryan Devitt

Bibliographic record

VenueLaw & Literature · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFrench Literature and Critical Theory
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooSt. Jerome's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpposition (politics)JurisprudencePhilosophyLawReflexive pronounReading (process)SociologyEpistemologyLiteraturePolitical scienceTheologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With its demonstration of human frailty and finitude, avant-garde literature offers a more rigorous jurisprudence of rights than juridical or legal discourse is capable of offering itself. The paper takes as example the lowering of fault requirements in Canadian criminal law, which weakens common-law protection of the fundamental right to liberty through a fault standard that is “not concerned with what was in the accused’s mind, but with what should have been there.” Avant-garde literature, in opposition, demonstrates—and cannot help but demonstrate, in a mode unique to its discourse—the real limits of seeing and knowing, as shown through a reading of Claude Ollier’s La Mise-en- Scène.

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 categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLaw & LiteratureSame topicFrench Literature and Critical TheoryFrench-language works237,207