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
BRACKETING the taxonomic controversies surrounding Speculative Realism (is it a species of thought, how many subclasses are there, does it cohere at all?) one can assert that the rhetorical if not argumenta-tive core of Quentin Meillassoux’s reopening of the ‘great outdoors’ has been, and continues to be, a pervasive trajectory in contemporary thinking. This wilderness is differently carved according to varying rubrics: the proliferation of entities (Harman), the unbinding of the tran-scendental power of thought (Brassier), the absolutisation of facticity (Meillassoux), and the precedence of being-as-nature prior to thinking (Grant). I wish to argue, unsurprisingly, for the importance of Grant’s model for speculatively navigating the spaces of nature. Grant’s position is fortified, I would argue, by the utilisation of Peirce’s continuum and the numerous thinkers of the geometric-cognitive (geo-cog) turn who cast alliances, however obliquely at times, with Schelling and the project of Naturphilosophie.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
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.
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