Born-Digital Memes as Archival Discourse: A Linked-Data Analysis of Cultural Sentiment and Polarization
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates how born-digital memes about high-profile events can serve as rich archival resources for understanding contemporary cultural phenomena and public sentiment by using a linked-data framework. Using a mixed-method approach, this study analyzes memes from a high-profile trial through web scraping and linked-data structures to map themes, sentiments, and cultural references. The linked-data frame includes data collection and integration, semantic web technologies, ontology development, and API data access. The findings point to dominant narratives and shifting sentiment, which further illustrate how such memes reflect and contribute to the polarization of the societal discourse concerning the event. This research is relevant for understanding digital culture, exploring the archival potential of born-digital materials, and assessing the dynamics of public opinion in widely publicized cases. By showing the efficiency of linked data methodologies in the analysis of born-digital discourse, we add valuable insights to both digital humanities and social sciences, offering a new approach of studying ephemeral online content as cultural artifacts.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it