MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W169260803

Body + Machine: Exploring Technological Fictions through a Collaborative Artistic Event in Schools

2005· article· en· W169260803 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Moniques Richard

Bibliographic record

VenueVisual arts research: educational, historical, philosophical, and psychological perspectives · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Games and Media
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPosthumanPosthumanismIdentity (music)SociologyEvent (particle physics)PedagogyMultidisciplinary approachAestheticsArtSocial science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Body + Machine, a collaborative artistic event, explores technologically mediated human relationships and their fictional portrayals. From a posthumanist theoretical stance, I examine this phenomenon from the implementation of three school projects with grade-schoolers, high school students, undergraduates, and artists in Quebec. I specifically ask: How does the mediatization of bodies through technology impact the means youth use to express their identities? In search of answers, I examine the concepts of posthumanism, corporeality, permutable identity, metaphoric fictions, and critical pedagogy. From the findings, I develop a posthuman pedagogy that: (a) gives access to technological fictions by critically discussing technology and presenting related artists' work; (b) varies youths' means of expression by combining informal and formal practices linked to technologies; and (c) articulates technological experiments with corporeal experiences in multidisciplinary, collaborative, and critical art projects. This pedagogy examines the ethical as well as the aesthetic aspects of technology in youth's lives.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0170.021
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.289
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVisual arts research: educational, historical, philosophical, and psychological perspectivesSame topicDigital Games and MediaFrench-language works237,207