MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081510220 · doi:10.1145/1453152.1453154

The aesthetics of emergence

2008· article· en· W2081510220 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInnovative Human-Technology Interaction
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersWestern Digital
KeywordsUnderpinningAestheticsCompetition (biology)SociologyJuryVisual artsPsychologyArtPolitical scienceEngineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we describe the aesthetics of emergence , which is our theoretical framework for an aesthetics of interaction and the underpinning of LoFi , an interactive A-life artwork that we are developing. We provide a survey of relevant concepts from the A-life and new media research communities, and we establish threads of commonalities with the HCI research community and especially the subset of that community that emphasizes aspects of user experience other than those that are characterized by performance-based measures. We describe and discuss several exemplar A-life artworks that are drawn from the last decade of jury selections of the annual Vida Art and Artificial Life Competition, conducted by Fundación Telefonica. We conclude with a discussion of issues that are common to the A-life and HCI research communities.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.855
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.260 · 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