MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7116374489 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.17987912

Archimetis: A Blueprint for an Architecture of Thought

2025· article· en· W7116374489 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M R Bischof

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicChaos, Complexity, and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArchitectureBlueprintSoulMetisReading (process)Meaning (existential)Space (punctuation)PerceptionIntersection (aeronautics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Archimetis is a thinking space at the intersection of awareness, organization, and change. This contribution is its blueprint: a first load-bearing structure, intentionally open - an orientation rather than a finished doctrine. It starts from the assumption that organizations possess an inner architecture: spaces of perception, implicit expectations, atmospheres, and layers of meaning that precede what is formally visible. The text unfolds four perspectives as a constellation: Architecture of attention the perceptual space in which organization takes form, Metis - the intelligence of navigating change while it is still in motion, Unfinishedness as method - the posture of keeping attention open without becoming arbitrary, Organization of the soul - inner coherence, belonging, and sense-making. Publication note: This Zenodo record is the canonical, versioned reference (DOI). Web and serial editions may differ editorially from this reference version. Tanslation note: This is an English translation of the German original (Zenodo DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17963661) How to cite: When referencing Archimetis, please cite this Zenodo version (DOI). Reading trails (entry points) Perception first: Attention architecture → Unfinishedness Change in motion: Metis → Attention architecture Sense & belonging: Organization of the soul → Attention architecture When everything speeds up: Unfinishedness → Metis

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score0.688

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.238 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicChaos, Complexity, and EducationFrench-language works237,207