Magnetic North : Canadian Experimental Video
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A major anthology published on the occasion of the video programme “Magnetic North” (2000), a cross-border collaboration curated by Lion for the Walker Art Centre (Minneapolis) and Video Pool Inc. (Winnipeg). The video programme included 40 tapes (produced between 1971 and 2000) by 47 artists, which were presented in a series of screenings that addressed the following themes: the body inscribed by time, disease or experience; the possibilities of the medium; the performance of self/identity; the spectacularity/banality of everyday life; conflict expressed in the flesh; explorations of self-disclosure, voyeurism and surveillance. The anthology contains an introductory text by Lion, critical essays by four authors, an historical essay by P. Gale, 14 short texts (by artists and writers from Canada and the U.S.) and two transcribed dialogues. The following issues and concerns are considered in response to the production and dissemination of experimental video in Canada: the role of artist-run centres; videos’ relation to the museum; issues of body, voice and narrative; relationships between fiction/reality and language/the body; food and the everyday; First Nations experimental film/video; the indigenous aesthetics; and video production in Quebec. Includes programme listing. Listing of Canadian artist-run centres and distributors that focus on video. Biographical notes on artists and authors. Circa 110 bibl. ref.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.079 | 0.005 |
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".