Bibliographic record
Abstract
From the Editor's DeskLast week as I filled out my "Diversity" form for UNLV, it struck me once more how inclusive of "diversity" popular culture study has always been.While I haven't gone back to check, I believe that every issue of Popular Culture Review has contained articles increasing our understanding of the complex relationships between race, gender, nationality, age, and popular culture, whether in film, music, comic strips, literature, advertising, or any of the other elements that make up the sea of popular culture in which we swim.This issue, as you will see, is no exception.Although PCR is 19 years old this year, its parent organization, Far West Popular Culture Association/American Culture Association, is celebrating its 20th anniversary (it took us an extra year to get the journal off the ground).Had someone told me 20 years ago that I'd still be putting on conferences in 2008, I'd have told them they were crazy.Yet here I am, and this conference boasts a healthy 150-person registration with topics as diverse as the participants, who this year come from all over the United States, Canada, Mexico, and even Saudi Arabia.On another note entirely, frequent journal contributor and conference participant Armand Singer died this year at the age of 92.A few weeks before his death, although ill and in the hospital, he called me both to chat and to make certain that his article, "'Filthy' Lewker Takes on Assorted Mountaineering Miscreants," had reached me.It had, and runs in this issue.Like Armand himself, it's funny, scholarly, and adventure-filled, proof that his intellectual capacities never diminished.For those of you interested in learning more about him, a blog called "Where's Armand" (http://uechi.typepad.com/wheres_armand/) celebrates his life, and what a life it was!After the conference last year, with ribs cracked from a bathtub fall, he flew to Patagonia, because, as he told me, "I've never seen those mountains and I'd better get on it."Armand was living proof that you don't have to be young to understand popular culture.Although he was a traditional scholar, he was as up on Harry Potter and all forms of adventure as he was on pop music and jazz.He had a knack for calling me out of the blue when I was feeling down to regale me with a recent exploit such as a tandem parachute jump made in his late 80s, yet another descent into the Grand Canyon, or a whirlwind drive across the United States behind the wheel of his fast car, always preceded or ended with a limerick made up on the spot.(Some of you may remember his propensity for reeling off limericks.Of special note was his limerick presentation at last year's conference, where he had the entire audience in stitches.)When he finished, I always felt much better, and much younger.Rock on, Armand, wherever you are!
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 | 0.003 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.241 | 0.166 |
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".