MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2592187950 · doi:10.1386/vi.5.3.369_1

Mentoring: To ease one into something, something not yet one’s own

2016· article· en· W2592187950 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueVisual Inquiry · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt Education and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMentorshipConversationFace (sociological concept)Scope (computer science)Point (geometry)SociologyProcess (computing)PsychologyAestheticsEpistemologyVisual artsComputer scienceArtCommunicationSocial sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article uses a conversation as the point of departure for considering the nature, qualities and scope of mentorship, and what mentorship does, enables and denies within academic relationships. Six art education colleagues gather to explore concepts, potentialities, places and practices of mentoring in a face-to-face interaction that leads to further musings through a collective writing process. From tweets to personal testimony, this subjective and philosophical unfolding negotiates possible routes for navigating some of the complexities, qualities, emotional landscapes, and interactions of the mentor/mentee relationship. We aim to challenge our own assumptions and expectations by asking critical questions, creating openings for other ways of knowing, and imagining what else might become possible when mentorship helps ease someone into something not yet one’s own.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.912
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.159
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.204 · 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