MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403898361 · doi:10.4324/9781032646930-13

If (world2vec) Then vec2politics

2024· book-chapter· en· W4403898361 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nicolas Chartier-Edwards, Étienne Grenier, Jonathan Roberge

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCybersecurity and Cyber Warfare Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An epistemic shock plagues social sciences when apprehending socio-technical issues: the massive deployment of algorithmic technologies, machine learning and ambient computing contributed both to the intensification of data production and the “ambiguation” of its results. The age of artificial intelligence (AI) is, in fact, one of machine adaptation. The multiplication of “smart” architectures and devices involved in all social practices, we want to argue, reactivates the need for a sociological theory of cybernetics. As these practices seem to vacillate more and more between control and communication, we are witnessing the emergence of a new socio-political theory of AI from the very innovation ecosystem that produces these machines. To tackle these new theories on how politics and society should align with AI, researchers must pay better attention to the intertwining of said industrial and political actors. Where circular unfolding and feedback loops act simultaneously as norms and modus operandi, it becomes crucial to study the network of relations. Drawing on Critical AI Studies and cybernetic theory, we want to understand this new socio-political vision and how its looping with the technicity of AI systems amounts to an auto-aggravating dynamic. Due to his centrality in the Canadian innovation ecosystem, his proximity with political actors, his publicity in the media, his internationalisation and his recent afflux in political writings on AI regulation, we settled on AI godfather Yoshua Bengio as a case study of a porteparole. The side-by-side study of algorithmic techniques such as “backpropagation” and “vectorisation” alongside Bengio socio-political visions thus informs us on the becoming of society under what we call vectoralism, or politics under AI.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.509
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.004

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCybersecurity and Cyber Warfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207