An Irigarayan Framework and Resymbolization in an Arts-Informed Research Process
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article discusses two distinct forms of resymbolization within an arts-informed research process. The particular research outlined herein involves the work of a group of women, including the author as participant-researcher, who investigated difficult experiences in teaching through writing, and who responded to one another’s stories through the use of various artistic media including paint, crayons, modeling clay, fabric, and blocks. The group’s over-arching purpose was to problematize the taken-for-granted ways that they had interpreted such experiences. The two distinct forms of resymbolization outlined in this paper occurred, in the first instance, during the work of the group, and in the second instance, during the author’s process of writing about the research. Through this paper, the author also works toward providing a theoretical framework that demonstrates why resymbolization is a crucial component of this arts-informed process. In doing so, the author draws on the work of feminist philosopher Luce Irigaray.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.025 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it