MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2636285186 · doi:10.1162/leon_a_01479

Land-Grant Hybrids: From Art and Technology to SEAD

2017· article· en· W2636285186 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

VenueLeonardo · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt, Technology, and Culture
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe artsFutures contractLand grantEngineering ethicsSociologyPolitical scienceLibrary scienceEngineering managementComputer scienceEngineeringBusinessPublic administration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors explore the role that public and land-grant universities play in sciences, engineering, arts and design (SEAD). They combine a networked institutional history of art and technology collaborations with an ethnographic study of SEAD initiatives. They use the notion of land-grant hybrids to describe widespread entanglements between research, teaching and public engagement. Their study identifies three “matters of concern” that aid in rethinking the origins, current practices and possible futures of SEAD: disparities in sponsored collaboration, the need for hybrid practitioners to demonstrate measurable impact and the ambiguities of what counts as appropriate art and reputable research.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.638
Threshold uncertainty score0.760

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.220 · 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