MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392447142 · doi:10.1080/10481885.2023.2290278

The Scrapyard and the Archive: A Comment on Grossmark’s “The Untelling”

2024· article· en· W4392447142 on OpenAlex
Dominique Scarfone

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

VenuePsychoanalytic Dialogues · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicNarrative Theory and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychoanalysisPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Robert Grossmark's “The Untelling” is an original contribution to the understanding of the psychoanalytic process, especially with the introduction of the notions of Untelling and of Filled-in and Hollowed-out enactments. This comment aims at favoring further exchanges with Grossmark, especially on the problem of meaning in relation to enactment and the importance of the time dimension in the changes that psychoanalysis can bring about. It is, namely, a matter of creating the category of the past. The metaphor of a scrapyard and the dangerous sharp objects it contains is used in relation to the clinical case. The metaphor illustrates how what is brought back through enactment into the analytic process does not carry in itself a fixed meaning, but can be given a workable meaning through handling the transference while ensuring both the reliability of the analytic frame and the analyst’s own passibility.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.226 · 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