MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Research Into Practice and A/r/tography: A Study of Kinship

2012· article· en· W2079707120 on OpenAlex
Michael Biggs, Daniela Büchler

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueVisual Arts Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArtistic and Creative Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersArts and Humanities Research Council
KeywordsKinshipThe artsDocumentationVariety (cybernetics)SociologyPerceptionGender studiesGenealogyPedagogyPsychologyAnthropologyVisual artsHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Using a model of kinship from Cohen, we describe our interaction with other arts research communities and examine our lived experiences with them over more than a decade. We refer to objective "evidence" in the form of documentation and production, encounters and conversations, told through our own perception of our community and of the other communities. The inquiry reveals both national differences and a variety of distinct intellectual frameworks, structures, institutional variations, and limitations among arts-based research communities in the UK, Canada, Australia, and Scandinavia. In particular, we find in the UK-based research of Biggs and Büchler, and the Canadian-based work of Springgay, Irwin, and Kind, fundamental genealogical roots that allow us to conclude that, despite their differences, they are kindred.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.716
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.424
GPT teacher head0.559
Teacher spread0.135 · 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