MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2184070693 · doi:10.26503/dl.v2013i1.663

Feminist Art Game Praxis

2014· article· en· W2184070693 on OpenAlexaff
Emma Westecott, Hannah E. Epstein, Alexandra Leitch

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBioethics and Human Rights Issues
Canadian institutionsOntario College of Art and Design
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPraxisGame studiesSociologyMetagamingGame art designGame designAestheticsGlitchEpistemologyArtGame DeveloperMedia studiesComputer scienceGame theoryMultimediaNon-cooperative gameSimultaneous game

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores multiple approaches to building an art game project created from a feminist perspective. Funded by a research grant, this can be seen as an experimental praxis that plays with connecting metaphors invoked in feminist theory to playable media. This connection is figurative not literal and manifests throughout the development process: in conception (artistic intent), production (technical approach) and engagement with existent and emergent theory. Intentionally playing in the space between art games and game art and inspired by Haraway’s Cyborg Manifesto, PsXXYborg1 is an art game in development that presents a rich cyber-feminist mythos across multiple screens as an allegorical play with the eternal fascination of 'becoming-machine'. PsXXYborg blends feminist art practice, makerism and academic research in order to birth itself as a glitch for the hermetically sealed structures of game culture. When politically motivated the game glitch aims at disturbing the hegemonic structures of normative game culture questioning the evident exclusions growing over time. Questions include: How can digital play represent and reflect the human condition? What is a feminist game? Why does society position play as inconsequential? How might we play our way to an equitable future?

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.019
Scholarly communication0.0090.007
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.003

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBioethics and Human Rights IssuesFrench-language works237,207