MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065078918 · doi:10.1080/01596306.2011.620756

Interrupting commemoration: thinking with art, thinking through the strictures of Argentina's<i>Espacio para la</i><i>memoria</i>

2011· article· en· W2065078918 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Mario Di Paolantonio

Bibliographic record

VenueDiscourse Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMemory, violence, and history
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAcknowledgementConversationMandateSociologyHumanitiesReading (process)Space (punctuation)Art historyTemporalityArtVisual artsMedia studiesLawPolitical sciencePhilosophyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, a few buildings within the Espacio para la memoria in Buenos Aires have been designated as a UNESCO Centre where, amongst other educational activities, evidentiary materials of the past repression are to be stored and displayed. Another building in the complex houses a Community Centre operated by the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo, where the mandate is to learn about and continue the revolutionary ideals of those disappeared during the repression. Amid these commemorative projects, designating a space for exhibiting art presents a significant opportunity for posing difficult questions, which go beyond the terms of information and idealization. Through a close reading of Diana Dowek's art exhibit, ‘A Long March’, the paper invites us to consider how art can draw out a particular haunting temporality that holds the present open to provocative questions that are difficult to pose and sustain amid the strictures of this commemorative site.

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)0.003
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0150.027
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.130
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiscourse Studies in the Cultural Politics of EducationSame topicMemory, violence, and historyFrench-language works237,207