MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2754411715 · doi:10.3138/seminar.53.3.05

Art in the Archives of Natural History: The Temporalities of Spoerri’s <i>Ein Inkompetenter Dialog?</i>

2017· article· en· W2754411715 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Cecilia Novero

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminar A Journal of Germanic Studies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDigital and Traditional Archives Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExhibitionNatural historyDialog boxTemporalityArtNatural (archaeology)Art historyVisual artsAestheticsHistoryArchaeologyComputer sciencePhilosophyWorld Wide WebEpistemologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The essay analyzes contemporary artist Daniel Spoerri’s 2012 retrospective exhibition, titled Ein Inkompetenter Dialog?, held at the Vienna Natural History Museum (NHM). The exhibition comprised a selection of works from Spoerri’s œuvre shown alongside a selection of the Museum’s specimens. I argue that juxtaposed with the Museum collection, Ein Inkompetenter Dialog?, both as a collection of works and as an archive of the career of the artist, playfully calls into question the “nature” of art, the presentation of nature in the NHM, and the temporality of the archive and natural history. Much of Spoerri’s œuvre involves the reworking and assemblage of his own collections of found objects. I argue that these imaginative assemblages, which merge human and non-human life, present concrete visions of possible alternative natural histories and prompt us to rethink natural history from a multispecies perspective, where humans and non-humans function as co-agents, and where history and natural history are fused. Overall, I argue that Spoerri’s creative exploration of the material archives of natural history presents an alternative approach to re-collecting the past, and the possibility of writing history for a non-anthropocentric future.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0130.028
Scholarly communication0.0160.014
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.193 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeminar A Journal of Germanic StudiesSame topicDigital and Traditional Archives ManagementFrench-language works237,207