Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research Background The ‘Colonial Afterlives’ exhibition consisted of contemporary responses from sixteen artists living in Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica, Barbados, Canada and Britain to the complex legacies of British occupation. The exhibition raised questions around the nature of post-colonial identity in an increasingly globalised world. The work Desires of Mute Things was included in the exhibition as a new commission and sought to question the ethics and legacy of presenting objects and images related to Tasmania’s colonial past, specifically in relationship to the colonial collection of the Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery. Research Contribution The Desires of Mute Things responded to the colonial collection of the Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery. It draws a broad outline around a network of contentious and problematic representations of people and place, specifically representations of early colonial history. The video in the installation shows objects, images and spaces within the museum while an anonymous voice follows a train of thought and speculates on the history and desires of the things that it encounters along the way. Research Significance The Desires of Mute Things was commissioned as part of a Salamanca Art Centre’s major international exhibition ‘Colonial Afterlives’ and was presented as part of the 2015 Ten Days festival program. The exhibition was curated by London-based curated Dr Sarah Thomas and will tour to several Australia galleries and regional museums over 2016-18.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".