Permission Granted: A Case Study of the Challenges and Opportunities of Creating Community Experiences at the Gladstone Hotel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract How do we create the conditions for dialogue and exchange within a cultural institution? When we cannot define a project from the outset, can we collectively create parameters for communities to unpack their own narratives in an inclusive and dynamic way? This paper examines the alternative models of exhibition and programming that are being employed by the Gladstone Hotel in Toronto, Canada. Situated as a multi‐purpose space, the Gladstone Hotel produces and hosts a myriad of exhibitions, arts, and cultural programming: acting as part‐community center, part‐bar, and part‐art space, the hotel's multifarious approach embraces experimentation and fosters vigorous discussion. The Gladstone Hotel is a contemporary community space that reflects Jane Jacobs's assertion that “new ideas need old buildings.” By examining several curatorial initiatives at the Gladstone, this article explores the ways in which alternative approaches to the concepts of “expert,” “gallery,” and “curator” are realized within the context of a hybrid space.
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 | 0.008 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.037 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".