MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1144093454

Depth of Perception

2015· article· en· W1144093454 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueComparative technology transfer and society · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMuseums and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExhibitionObject (grammar)Visual artsPerceptionRepresentation (politics)SociologySpace (punctuation)Presentation (obstetrics)ArchitectureSituatedAestheticsArtMedia studiesComputer sciencePsychologyLawArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Depth of Perception OAKVILLE GALLERIES OAKVILLE, ONTARIO JANUARY 18-MARCH 15, 2015 [ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] Addressing the complexities and failures of dominant modes of representation, the group exhibition Depth of Perception included a range of video, installation, and new media works that explore the nuanced and ever-evolving mediation of contemporary experience. In the accompanying exhibition essay, curator Jon Davies argues that, with the current prevalence of mobile screen-based media, we are increasingly attuned to the tactility of the technology that we use, as screens themselves become tangible and require an unprecedented amount of interaction. Many of the works included were similarly focused on their own tactility, considering the strengths, weaknesses, and nuances of the media within which they operate. Judy Radul'S work focused most intently on its own presence and the surroundings within which it was situated. Her body of work titled Object Analysis Spectator Poem (2012) involves both the presentation and representation of a number of objects that are placed in the gallery space and yet found simultaneously in documentation showing them in environments outside the gallery. The objects included a camera, a chair, a conch shell, and a heater. Loosely on top of each object was a colorful copper sheet molded to roughly mimic the object's form. Brought to a parking lot, park, or similar public space, the objects were then photographed using a mirror, with approximately half of the frame showing the reflection and the other half showing the space in front of the camera. While the mirror is disorienting at first, the compounded levels of representation make it clear that the viewer is not looking directly at the object, and indicate that such a direct view is impossible with these, or any, photographs. As with the camera's internal mirrors, one is, in fact, always seeing a reflection. On the gallery wall, viewers first and foremost see a photograph, and not a park, parking lot, or other exterior space. The intent behind the molded copper, however, was less clear. The didactic tags referred to the copper sheet as a flawed rendering of the object, though there seemed to be little attempt at any verisimilitude. There is, of course, an inherent contradiction in referring to any actual verisimilitude, since that which is simulated is, by definition, not the thing itself. It is possible that this was the point. As with the mirrored images, viewers saw only an imperfect representation, rendered in a material that differs greatly from that which it represents. A question that has lingered since viewing the work, however, is: Why copper? Of all the materials that could be molded to loosely form the shape of these assorted objects, why use copper and not a more common sculptural material? Is it because copper has been used for centuries in printmaking, as a solid but workable material that retains printmakers impressions well? Or might it reference the use of copper in mirrors? Early mirrors were often simply polished copper, and even today most consist of layers of copper, silver, and glass, as well as a range of other synthetic materials. Like the loosely draped sheets, however, none of these readings quite fit, and the artist may have chosen the material simply because it is malleable and can hold a distinct color, concealing yet following the contours of the unassuming object beneath. While Radul explores our perception of these everyday objects, Oliver Husain's videos occupy a space between the banal and the fantastical. His video Leona Alone (2009), originally commissioned by the Toronto-based Public Access Collective and EOT. Experiments in Urban Research for the Leona Drive Project (2009), explores a rather unremarkable Toronto neighborhood through the use of autonomous stained-glass windows. The first four minutes consist of a series of shots of streets, buildings, and construction sites, each with a freestanding, ornate stained-glass window positioned within the frame. …

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 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)0.000
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.642
Threshold uncertainty score0.245

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.168 · 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