MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2805778718 · doi:10.1111/var.12153

“Tell me why, why, why”: A Critical Commentary on the Visuality of Settler Expectation

2018· article· en· W2805778718 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Audra Simpson

Bibliographic record

VenueVisual Anthropology Review · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArchaeology and Rock Art Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistère de l'Énergie et des Ressources Naturelles
KeywordsExhibitionIndigenousFilmographySubject (documents)Desert (philosophy)The artsPoliticsSociologyPsychological interventionAestheticsCultural studiesVisual artsMedia studiesArtAnthropologyPolitical sciencePsychologyLawComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

If we were to take the traditional, reified, thought‐to‐be‐disappearing subject of anthropological and governmental capture and erasure and flip the expectations that both structure and then attempt to govern this subject, what would we make of what they say or do or look? This commentary piece reflects on the decolonizing politics embedded within Indigenous cultural interventions, focusing in particular on two specific interventions: the “Desert Animations” traveling exhibition of experimentation in Central and Western Desert arts, and the Karrabing Indigenous Film Collective filmography.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0150.038
Scholarly communication0.0090.008
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0180.024
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.399 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVisual Anthropology ReviewSame topicArchaeology and Rock Art StudiesFrench-language works237,207