MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413832277 · doi:10.1344/jnmr.v6.40226

Pandemicity and Subjectivity: the posthumanist vulnerability of the zoe/geo/techno framed subject

2022· article· en· W4413832277 on OpenAlexaff
Christine Daigle, Ilaria Santoemma

Bibliographic record

VenueMatter Journal of New Materialist Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGothic Literature and Media Analysis
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubjectivitySubject (documents)Vulnerability (computing)AestheticsSociologyEpistemologyPsychologyArtPhilosophyComputer scienceWorld Wide WebComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused unprecedented global disruptions, including a fundamental alteration to how humans exist. In this paper, we argue that the disruptions brought forth by the pandemic have provided us with a new perspective that allows us to better understand the various entanglements that are constitutive of the beings we are, but that also render us fundamentally vulnerable. Grounded in a posthumanist material feminist position, we adopt a view of matter as entangled and embrace the notion of agentic capacity while elaborating a definition of posthumanist subjectivity and its peculiar vulnerability. Building our analysis on Rosi Braidotti’s formulation of the zoe/geo/techno assemblage, we further develop this frame navigating through the different entanglements that constitute the posthumanist subjectivity we scrutinize, considering each type from the perspective of the pandemic. As we argue, the increase in one type of entanglement at the expense of others may be generative of new possibilities but can also limit our thriving. What defines us as humans is the fact that we are constituted via the threefold entanglement of zoe, geo, and techno, radically boosting one and diminishing the others—purposefully or not—is bound to have significant impacts. Further, we claim that we cannot in fact isolate one type of entanglement from the others: each impacts the other as they themselves are also entangled.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.094
Scholarly communication0.0090.010
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.319 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMatter Journal of New Materialist ResearchSame topicGothic Literature and Media AnalysisFrench-language works237,207