MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392011213 · doi:10.1016/j.cpa.2024.102723

Artificial imaginaries: Generative AIs as an advanced form of capitalism

2024· article· en· W4392011213 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Perspectives on Accounting · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Economy and Work Transformation
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapitalismGenerative grammarSociologyEconomic systemNeoclassical economicsPolitical scienceEconomicsPhilosophyLinguisticsLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this essay, we characterize three paradoxical imaginaries that structure the development of generative artificial intelligence (genAI). At the institutional level, these technologies develop in a context that celebrates openness and liberality. Yet, both in the US and in Europe, they serve to centralize power and resources. At the organizational level, while the imaginary is that these technologies make work more interesting, we show that they rather produce anxiety and a new class of precarious workers. At the epistemic level, generative artificial intelligence promises access to unlimited knowledge. This knowledge may appear robust, as these technologies become performative. However, the knowledge they produce is doubtful. Overall, these technologies centralize power and exclude, they standardize knowledge, and they produce, reproduce, amplify and extend various structures of domination.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.338
Threshold uncertainty score0.511

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.329 · 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