MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415767497 · doi:10.1080/15295036.2025.2560497

Unzipping my library: containing the Game Boy’s history in the Analogue Pocket

2025· article· en· W4415767497 on OpenAlexafffund
Alex Custodio

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Studies in Media Communication · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicThemes in Literature Analysis
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGame theoryConsumer Culture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the legal, cultural, and political economic dimensions of Game Boy preservation through an analysis of the Analogue Pocket. Released in 2021, the Analogue Pocket is not a Game Boy in the strictest sense; however, its ability to play Game Boy cartridges and its marketing as a library for the handheld’s history reveal it as an element of the platform’s technical imaginary. When I speak of the imaginary, I refer to the techniques, technologies, and fantasies that accompany a platform and that continue to negotiate its meanings as a cultural, computational, and commercial object. Emerging at the nexus of informal user practices connected to emulation, homebrew, and piracy, the Analogue Pocket points to multiple ways the Game Boy’s history has been imagined and contained—from physical cartridges to digital storage formats, from online archives to the legal systems that attempt to manage them. Looking at these containers offers insight into the material infrastructures of Game Boy preservation and play.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0130.024
Scholarly communication0.0120.014
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.242 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Studies in Media CommunicationSame topicThemes in Literature AnalysisFrench-language works237,207