The appropriation of a digital "speakers" corner
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
Interactive digital technologies embedded in urban spaces typically tend to be used to deliver news, context-relevant information and commercial advertisements. To design urban technologies that will serve other ends, we first need to know how people might want to interact with them. Using an ethnographic approach, we collected field data in order to better understand this. This study presents some of the findings of our qualitative evaluation of MÉGAPHONE, an interactive artistic installation deployed in a public space in downtown Montréal, Canada. In this paper, we provide thick descriptions of our detailed field observations and interviews with participants conducted over the ten-week deployment with a deep focus on how users appropriated this system. Our results highlight four public interaction strategies as a set of abstractions that suggest how people might want to make use of interactive public installations: place-making, self-representing, first-person news reporting and bootstrapping online presence with digital recordings.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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