MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994756622 · doi:10.1145/2733373.2808107

Disturbed System

2015· article· en· W1994756622 on OpenAlexaff
Oksana Krzyhanivska, Simon Fay, Jeffrey E. Boyd

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInnovative Human-Technology Interaction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisitor patternSculptureHuman–computer interactionStyle (visual arts)Visual artsAffordanceComputer scienceInstallation artDigital artSightMultimediaAestheticsArtThe artsVisual arts education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper discusses a collaborative project that inquires about the possibilities of the tactile sensation in art and its ability to reestablish human sensory relationships with consumer technology. It introduces the visitor to the interaction style practiced by the artists with their medium. The described interactive sculpture predisposes the visitor to explore tactile interaction as an aesthetic experience within multimodal multisensory system. Disturbed System takes the visitor's experience with the artwork into unfamiliar sensory territory. Touching the soft silicone surface of the sculpture provides electronic feedback of embedded vibration and directional spatialized sound in an installation format. The artwork presents this sensory information in a form of unexpected assemblage of pulsing organic sculptural surfaces and emitting sound. It also places visitors in a shared interactive space, an aura of traveling sound warped by their touch of the sculpture. This shared interaction investigates relationships between nature, artifice, technology, human body and human social group behavior.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.164
Threshold uncertainty score0.548

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1640.104

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInnovative Human-Technology InteractionFrench-language works237,207