A cinematic catalyst for (Re)thinking nuclear narratives
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
More than 60 years ago, Günther Anders diagnosed the problem of the atomic age as a problem of the imagination, defining ‘the Promethean Discrepancy’ as the gap between what we imagine to be possible and what is actually possible. Using Christopher Nolan’sOppenheimer (2023) as case study, we ask to what extent film can help to narrow the Promethean Discrepancy and explore the consequences of this imagining. Ultimately, we argue that Oppenheimer has limited ‘anti-nuclear effects’ as a result of stifling nuclear fear. Nuclear fear is mitigated in two key ways. Firstly, as a reproduction of the ‘nuclear origin myth’, Oppenheimer relies upon numerous narrative tropes which serve the nuclear status quo. Secondly, even when presenting the apocalyptic potential of nuclear weaponry, Oppenheimer (2023) mitigates nuclear fear by emphasising a reliance on the ‘hero-warrior-protector’, whether this be military or scientific elites, forces of fate, or the power of gods.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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