Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The objective of this article is to problematize a notion of relational violence, also referred to as violence in domestic realms or relationship-based violence, drawing on its representation in the visual arts. The discussed examples illustrating the dynamics of violence include two American artists: Barbara Kruger's project organized in Glasgow in the Gallery of Modern Art in association with Amnesty International in 2005, and Bruce Nauman's video installations Anthro-Socio (1992) exhibited as part of his solo exhibition at Musee d'Art Contemporain in Montreal in 2007, and Violent Incident (1986) from the Tate Collection. Drawing on visual representation, I reflect on how different ways of narrating can either encourage or discourage our understandings of violence and the promotion of equality more generally. Framing the ways institutional power operates, here in relation to an organization of my academic role and other roles, involves a production and negotiation of meanings as well as embodiment. In such a context, reflections emerge with regard to my own positioning, concerning ambivalence about the politics of representation and the representation of the politics in the processes that are observed, analysed and showcased.
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 | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.062 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".