MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391618006 · doi:10.32920/25174889

Public and Ordinary Bad Feelings: Neoliberal Depression and its Art

2024· preprint· en· W4391618006 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Media and Philosophy
Canadian institutionsOntario College of Art and DesignToronto Metropolitan UniversityCentre for Social InnovationYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapitalismFeelingDepression (economics)PoliticsNeoliberalism (international relations)SociologyField (mathematics)Michel foucaultSection (typography)PsychoanalysisAestheticsGender studiesSocial sciencePolitical scienceArtPsychologySocial psychologyLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>This paper attends to contemporary literature that looks at depression within wider political, social, and economic contexts. The core scholars examined in this section include Byung-Chul Han, Bernard Stiegler, Naomi Klein, and Michel Foucault. Through a review and critical analysis of their texts, this section of the paper demonstrates that depression should be thought of as a reasonable affective response to neoliberal capitalism. The second half of this paper examines various theories about the relationship between creative practice, art, technology, and neoliberal depression. Authors on this topic include Christine Ross, Ann Cvetkovich, Nicolas Bourriaud, Anthony Dunne, and Fiona Raby. By attending to the intersection of creative practice and neoliberal depression, this paper acts as a survey of the field, thereby uncovering what art can contribute to this vital discourse.</p>

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.017
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDigital Media and PhilosophyFrench-language works237,207