MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1578056517 · doi:10.7559/citarj.v6i1.130

‘Machinic Trajectories’: Appropriated Drawing Machines as Post-Digital Devices

2014· article· en· W1578056517 on OpenAlex
Andres Wanner

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Science and Technology of the Arts · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Media and Philosophy
Canadian institutionsEmily Carr University of Art and Design
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlitchRealmComputer scienceContext (archaeology)Technical drawingHuman–computer interactionComputer graphics (images)AestheticsEngineering drawingArtTelecommunicationsEngineeringLawHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents a series of works called Machinic Trajectories, consisting of domestic devices appropriated as mechanical drawing machines. These are contextualized within the post-digital discourse, which integrates messy analog conditions into the digital realm. The role of eliciting and examining glitches for investigating a technology is pointed out. Glitches are defined as short-lived, unpremeditated aesthetic results of a failure; they are mostly known as digital phenomena, but I argue that the concept is equally applicable to the output of mechanical machines. Three drawing machines will be presented: The Opener, The Mixer and The Ventilator. In analyzing their drawings, emergent patterns consisting of unpremeditated visual artifacts will be identified and connected to irregularities of the specific technologies. Several other artists who work with mechanical and robotic drawing machines are introduced, to situate the presented works and reflections in a larger context of practice and to investigate how glitch concepts are applicable to such mechanical systems.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.577
Threshold uncertainty score0.525

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.218 · 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