The Scrapyard and the Archive: A Comment on Grossmark’s “The Untelling”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.040 | 0.035 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".