MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396227370 · doi:10.1017/9781009329668

Sensorium

2024· book· en· W4396227370 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

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2024
Typebook
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEmbodied and Extended Cognition
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Do the senses have a history? How many might there be? Are the senses so many independent channels, or do they interact with and modulate each other? If so, how might we cultivate the capacity to see feelingly or hear colours? What makes smell 'the affective sense'? These are among the questions to be addressed in this Element. It pries the senses and perception loose from the psychology laboratory to focus on how they have been constructed and lived differently in different historical periods and across cultures. Many of its findings are surprising because they run counter to our common-sense assumptions about the sensorium. They make uncommon sense. Plus the reader will meet some fascinating historical characters like the prolific 17th century natural philosopher Margaret Cavendish (also author of the play The Convent of Pleasure) and the late 19th century artist James McNeill Whistler, who infused his paintings with music.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.675
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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.184 · 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