Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the 1980’s accusations were made against some strange bedfellows, from primary school teachers to film makers and heavy metal music artists – all were accused of being Satanists. Musicians were said to have used editing and mixing techniques sometimes known as ‘backward masking’ to deliver messages encouraging listeners to harm themselves. It was part of a phenomenon called “Satanic Panic.” \n \nThese accusations played out heavily “in the high school halls and in the shopping malls” of the suburbs, even in Etobicoke, at Cloverdale, at Honeydale, at the ice rink, at the bowling alley on Dundas near Six Points, at the video store at the Burnhamthorpe strip mall, in Square One, at Michael Power, at Burnhamthorpe Collegiate...it was on tv, MuchMusic - governments and everyone discussed it... \n \nIn particular the bands Judas Priest and Black Sabbath/Ozzy Osbourne spent months in court over the accusations. It was alleged that after hearing this music, fans had injured themselves. \n \nThis installation, consisting of a single cassette stereo and headphones and a stack of cards with recorded cassette(s), considers those accusations, recreating backward masked suggestions that in court were said to be ineffective.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.088 | 0.021 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".