The concept formerly known as information (the panel)
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
Abstract This session introduces a new approach to the concept of information, utilizing an arts‐informed, visual approach. 137 graduate students from a North American iSchool were asked “What is information?” and responded by drawing upon a 4” by 4” piece of paper, coined an “iSquare.” The drawings of information () were analyzed using compositional and thematic analysis techniques adapted from precedent visual studies. The results include the identification of the most common graphical representations used to express information, as well as three themes pertaining to the social, technological, and “informational” dimensions of information. This panel employs the iSquare study and its outcomes as a springboard to engage – afresh – the concept of information today. After the original research is reported, invited experts from information science, museum studies, and social epistemology will offer commentary. “The Concept Formerly Known as Information” is a riff on the antics of American singer‐songwriter Prince, who in 1993 changed his name to an unpronounceable glyph and was called (for a short time) “The Artist Formerly Known as Prince.” This panel seeks a similar jolt to the status‐quo when the concept of information is transformed from word to image.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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