MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965503305 · doi:10.1177/1532708603239265

Stan Douglas and the Aesthetic Critique of Urban Decline

2003· article· en· W1965503305 on OpenAlexaffabout
Warren Crichlow

Bibliographic record

VenueCulture Studies &#x2194 Critical Methodologies · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt Education and Development
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAestheticsNarrativeArbitrarinessModernityUrbanismPoliticsVisual artsSociologyArtArchitectureLiteratureEpistemologyPolitical sciencePhilosophyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past two decades, Vancouver-based artist Stan Douglas has produced an evolving body of photographic, slide projection and sound, and film and video installation projects. From nascent large-scale panoramic landscape photographs to intellectually probing multimedia narratives on urbanism's transformations, his works persistently excavate the social, political, and epistemological arbitrariness of modernity's claim to progress. Douglas locates his muse in the decrepit past and fabricates, through technical and material means, visual spaces where irrepressible difficulties and dangers, saliencies, and pleasures emerge. Like the best contemporary visual art forms, Douglas's film and video installations are highly cognitive and perceptual, designed for experience and completion by unforeseeable meanings the viewer may produce. This article explores the implications of Stan Douglas's work for rethinking the social and cultural contexts of education today.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.232

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0190.049
Scholarly communication0.0120.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.162
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations6
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCulture Studies &#x2194 Critical MethodologiesSame topicArt Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207