MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6991401030

HONR 300Ab (AH) The dangerous art of truth-telling and truth-seeking Benedix Spring 2024

2024· article· en· W6991401030 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarly and Creative Works from DePauw University (DePauw University) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRadio, Podcasts, and Digital Media
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvictionStatement (logic)MillHearsayClass (philosophy)MistakeTerrainCredibility
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canadian journalist Terry Glavin made a statement on a recent episode of the podcast, “Honestly,” that has been plaguing me: “what I find more troubling than the fact that the truth doesn't seem to matter [with regards to media] is that it doesn't seem to matter that the truth doesn't matter.” I find this troubling, too. How can the truth not matter? And yet, in so many spheres--politics, education, media--truth often seems to be subjugated to confirmation bias. My first impulse in creating this class led to the title “The (dangerous and outdated?) art of truth-telling and truth-seeking.” I don’t like that title anymore. It feels glib and cynical. Upon further reflection, I don’t think the art is outdated in any capacity. Everywhere I look, I see evidence of people—artists, musicians, writers, comedians, activists, journalists, chefs, kids, teachers, students, my very best friends (!)—speaking truth to power, who courageously enact the conviction that they have something to say that the world needs to hear, who earnestly believe that hearing this truth will make the world a better place. I kept “dangerous,” but took the question mark away, because there’s no question that, in today’s climate (and maybe from the beginning of time), it is dangerous to speak truths that people don’t want to hear. I have two main hopes for this class: 1) that we’ll explore the wide terrain of truth-telling/truth-seeking, in the efforts of identifying voices/styles/approaches that resonate (and/or don’t) and identifying patterns in texts (broadly defined) that claim (or seem to claim) to be telling the truth, and 2) that, by the end of the semester, we’ll have a set of products (broadly defined), collectively and independently created by everyone, that we can share with a general audience. The mission: to nail down slices of truth(s) that we think desperately need to be brought into the world, packaged in a way that people will really hear and contemplate what we’re saying. The second half of the semester will include planning and implementing an event that will invite an audience into this space of truth-telling/hearing.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.646
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarly and Creative Works from DePauw University (DePauw University)Same topicRadio, Podcasts, and Digital MediaFrench-language works237,207