Bibliographic record
Abstract
Those who had passed through the doors of Midtown – and, almost invariably – other institutions repeatedly, were sometimes more dismissive of my line of enquiry. The phrase ‘singing frogs’ came from a conversation with David, a governor visiting from Bermuda. He was somewhat resistant to the idea prisons were noisy, but tacitly understood the role acclimation played in this. He was too deeply embedded within the rhythms of the institution to consciously discern them. Sound was heavily implicated in processes of institutionalization. Prompting people to reflect on their shifting interpretations of the soundscape provided a means of assessing both their degree of familiarity with the environment and feelings about the place and people within it. For some, familiarity with the prison soundscape reflected sustained contact with a broader range of institutions with which its clangs and bangs reverberated. For others, the soundscape was a particularly harsh aspect of the environment, compounding and exacerbating other conditions, including ASD and PTSD. While waiting for staff to assemble for a security meeting, I sat with David. He enquired about what I was doing and expressed incredulity that I held keys and seemed to move around with freedom. When I explained my purpose, he responded: ‘I’ve never thought of prisons as noisy places. I still don't but it reminds me of friends we have who visit from Canada. They can't sleep at night for the singing frogs, they go all through the night and make a racket. We’re so accustomed to it we don't hear it. ’The exchange between David and I raised a central point: does sound matter if it is not perceived as significant by those you speak with? And if so, why and how? When I asked how he relaxed, he said: “I like to unwind, no talking. Sometimes I like to just drive around. If I go straight back home, I’m a different person.” His dismissal of the significance of prison noise was contradicted by his use of sound (and space) as part of his shedding ritual. Manipulating his sonic environment was crucial for David, in guarding against ‘spillover’ of his work life into his private life. Curating his soundscape allowed him to leave the prison behind, to ‘shed’ it (Crawley, 2004).
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.007 |
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".