Bibliographic record
Abstract
How is perception a constitutive force in interactive media environments and how does it effect its cultural and social conditions? This question provides the ground for a conceptual and practical development of the term immediation. Immediation describes the immediacy of esthetic sensation and locates the event of immediated experience in everyday life. It highlights the immediacy with which digital processes enhance or delimit perception and affect through directly shaping experience. The immersive and interactive media environment Panoscope—a 360° hemispheric and fully immersive projection space—offers ways for developing two main aspects of immediation: (1) immediation underlining the creative role of perception as neither subjective nor objective but relational, embodied, and located in everyday life and (2) the reconsideration of the digital not as pure abstraction but a relational process immanent to perception. By unfolding the concept of digital or signaletic mattering, the coemergence of material conditions and processes of thinking will be emphasized.Immediation as process and practice of signaletic matteringAll authorsChristoph Brunnerhttps://doi.org/10.3402/jac.v4i0.18154Published online:15 June 2012Display full size Christoph Brunner is a cultural theorist currently working as research associate at the Institute for Critical Theory at Zurich University of the Arts. He is finishing a PhD thesis on research creation and esthetic politics at Concordia University, Montreal. He recently co-edited the book Practices of Experimentation: Research and Teaching in the Arts Today and is part of the editorial collective of Inflexions: A Journal for Research Creation (http://www.inflexions.org).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.047 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.019 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".