MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2495848461 · doi:10.1017/s0307472200015200

Exhibiting information literacy: site-specific art and design interventions at the Ontario College of Art & Design

2008· article· en· W2495848461 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueArt Libraries Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt Education and Development
Canadian institutionsOntario College of Art and Design
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExhibitionInformation literacyStudioDesign studioStudio artArt and designVisual artsLibrary scienceVisual literacyArt methodologyPsychological interventionSociologyLiteracyContemporary artVisual arts educationArtPedagogyPsychologyComputer scienceArt historyPerformance art

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Ontario College of Art & Design is a university that provides undergraduate education to a markedly diverse student body. Although the Dorothy H. Hoover Library offers proactive information literacy programming targeting academic research needs, only peripheral support was traditionally given to studio practice. To rectify this gap the reference librarians, in dialogue with selected design and art faculty, endorsed a Library exhibition program using the Library as both case study and exhibition site. An analysis of several works featured in a recent exhibition demonstrates how art can establish an eloquent dialogue with a visually-oriented learning community and lead to the examination of key philosophical and ethical issues in librarianship.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.305
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.093
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.149 · 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