MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2589578317

Not at the beginning and not at the end: A Conversation among Deidre Logue, Allyson Mitchell and Helena Reckitt

2015· book-chapter· en· W2589578317 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Helena Reckitt, Deidre Logue, Allyson Mitchell

Bibliographic record

VenueGoldsmiths (University of London) · 2015
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt, Politics, and Modernism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQueerConversationExhibitionSociologyGender studiesInvisibilityArtFeminismQueer theoryContemporary artVisual artsAestheticsArt historyPerformance art
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A conversation about feminist and queer curatorial and artistic practice between artists Deidre Logue and Allyson Mitchell, who together founded and run the Feminist Art Gallery (FAG) in Toronto, and Helena Reckitt, a curator with a longstanding interest in legacies of queer and feminist engagements with art and theory. The contributors start by focusing on the role of art history and criticism in constructing genealogies of queer and feminist art, what these scholarly and critical activities uncover or obscure, and the contributions of artists in furthering knowledges of these histories. Taking a more pragmatic turn, the discussion moves to Logue and Mitchell’s work founding and running FAG. Defining FAG as a feminist, not a women’s, art project, they clarify how the gallery, and related activities such as the Feminist Art Collection (FAC), are equally engaged with gender, race, class and ability. Contributors highlight queer and feminist curatorial and artistic projects from the past that have influenced their practices. In considering a range of earlier projects, they discuss tactics including breaking art historical rules, appropriating non-queer art within a queer frame, drawing attention to processes of historical invisibility and exclusion, engaging with erotic artistic content, and creating experimental and interactive exhibition formats. The authors end by discussing the implications of FAG being housed in a domestic space, and their strategy of accepting an invitation on behalf of FAG and “fagging it forward” to someone else who would benefit from the opportunity.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.202

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0520.031
Scholarly communication0.0140.013
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0150.024
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.150 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGoldsmiths (University of London)Same topicArt, Politics, and ModernismFrench-language works237,207