MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794576665 · doi:10.29311/mas.v15i3.2543

Art Museum Dining: The History of Eating Out at the Art Gallery of Ontario

2018· article· en· W2794576665 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

VenueMuseum and Society · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCulinary Culture and Tourism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArt galleryIdeologyNarrativeVisual artsInclusion (mineral)MuseologyArtMedia studiesExhibitionSociologyPolitical scienceAnthropologyLawPoliticsLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using archival materials from the Art Gallery of Ontario (AGO), this article recreates the culinary history of the art museum and advocates for the inclusion of food in the literature on art museum history and practice. The AGO, like many other North American art museums, has a rich culinary history, which started with dining events organized by volunteer women’s committees since the 1940s. These culinary programs generated a culinary culture grounded in gourmet ideologies, which became the grounds for the first official eating spaces in the museum in the mid-1970s. Awareness of the museum’s culinary history offers an opportunity to liberate the museum from prescriptive theoretical models which are not anchored in institutional realities; these hide aspects of gender and class which become visible through food narratives.KeywordsArt museum restaurants, culinary programming, women’s committees, multisensorial museums, Art Gallery of Ontario

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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.176 · 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