MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2326620605 · doi:10.1177/1359183513486231

Site-specificity and dislocation: Michael Nicoll Yahgulanaas and his Haida Manga <i>Meddling</i>

2013· article· en· W2326620605 on OpenAlexafffund
Nicola Levell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Material Culture · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMuseums and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of CambridgeEconomic and Social Research CouncilCanada Council for the Arts
KeywordsBiographyContext (archaeology)SociologySubject (documents)DisciplinePoliticsAnthropologyArt historyArtHistoryArchaeologySocial scienceLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tracing the critical biography of Pedal to the Meddle (2007) – a Haida Manga intervention, originated by Michael Nicoll Yahgulanaas – this article explores the biography of indigenized artworks that are generated as a site-specific form of institutional critique but later dislocated, mobilized and rearticulated in other disciplinary spaces. In its original context, Pedal to the Meddle was conceptualized and created to critique museum practices, the politics of ownership and First Nations’ dispossession on the Northwest Coast. However, when this artwork was dislocated from its site of origin and re-curated in other exhibitionary spaces, its indigenized critique, relational aesthetics and locational meanings were inevitably altered. It is these retellings, through the artist’s practice, different spaces, material configurations, collaborative processes and curatorial voices that constitute the subject of this article.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0280.028
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Material CultureSame topicMuseums and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207