Art et nouvelles technologies : pour un recadrage de la subjectivité humaine par rapport à l’idée de paysage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article addresses the impact of new media on concepts of landscape. More precisely, it concerns artistic projects using new media that incorporate elements of nature. It shows how these projects participate in an economy of landscape, but at the same time reformulate the very principles associated with the genre. Four projects are presented as case studies: Glenlandia (2005–07) by Susan Collins, Osmose (1995) by Charlotte Davies, Tele-Garden (1995–2004) by Kenneth Goldberg and Joseph Santarromana, and One Tree(s) (1999–) by Natalie Jeremijenko. In essence, these projects deal not with ecology so much as with new spatio-temporal relations of the perceiving subject with nature, relations always mediated by the concept of landscape. As defined by “ecosophy,” these spatio-temporal relations are open to exploration and adaptation characterized by continuous change. These changes include distortion, movement, and a form of blindness that weaken the dominant position of vision in human perception of the world. The projects in question overturn the opposition between humanity and nature that had been, from the beginning of the modern era, the basis of landscape, a genre characterized by frontality, alterity, and pure opticality.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".