The Life of Droids: A Droidean Corporeal Horror
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this article the life of droids is explored through a weaving of scenes, dialogue, analysis, theory and an exhibition. The imagery and text are employed to work through the experiences of the droids and the relationships that are revealed, or perhaps even presenced (Heidegger, 1993). The works of Heidegger and Camus on technology and science, the story of Viktor Frankenstein’s absence of care for ‘his’ creation, and insights from Daniel Wallace’s book, Star Wars: The New Essential Guide to Droids add textual flavour to the images that have been produced by the authors and that invite exploration of life in the age of droidean corporeal horror. In this exhibition of machine lives, the images are presented as uncanny moments (Rancière, 2010), revealing questions concerning technology and being (Heidegger, 1993). The educational intention of this work is not to emancipate machine life through the horror stories of droidean cultures and communities, but rather to offer insights into the error of Modern mastery.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".