No meio do feed tinha um poema : considerações sobre a escrita de instapoesia e suas dinâmicas interativas
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The research in question seeks to reflect, based on the literary phenomenon known as instapoetry, on the ways in which the processes of writing and sharing poetry occur through Instagram’s affordances, as well as the self-presentation and interaction with readers by poets within the social network. To do so, initially, the proposed work relies on various kinds of theoretical contributions, especially discussions focused on literary expansions, literature as a form of communication, and Platform Studies, in order to grasp the diverse facets that constitute the dynamics of instapoetry. In addition to this effort, a netnographic investigation (Montardo; Jung Rocha, 2005) of the accounts of Rupi Kaur (@rupikaur_ on Instagram), Igor Pires/"Textos Cruéis Demais" (@textoscrueisdemais), Amanda Lovelace (@ladybookmad), and Atticus (@atticuspoetry) is carried out, once they are relevant exponents of this viral type of poetry. Their works and contact with the public during the first quarter of 2022 are reunited and examined according to four analytical sections: 1) posting overview, with general notes on the frequency and types of posts found in the four accounts; 2) the instapoems, with descriptions about the ways in which each one of the artists produces and promotes the poems; 3) digital presence and interaction with readers, looking at how the artists present themselves and engage with their followers; 4) monetization of work, a section interested in the commercial exploration of instapoetry. The analysis of the corpus allows us to perceive, among other aspects, that we are talking about literary productions that sometimes collide with, sometimes adapt to the modus operandi of the platform (whether in the pace of posting, the writer's self-exposure or the direct and daily contact with the public), in addition to coexisting with a series of other posts common to the social media logic. In this sense, focusing on the activities that take place in the chosen profiles proves to be fundamental for, more than sticking to the particular dynamics of the authors with their readers, discussing the constant reconfigurations of poetic making and its specificities in the digital space.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it