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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study asks, what strategies do curators as design thinkers use to foster social engagement in art exhibitions? Through examinations of the curatorial strategies in two case studies: A Mile in My Shoes, curated by Clare Patey (2015) at the Empathy Museum in London, and Boxed, curated by Sheila Sampath (2017) at The Public Studio in Toronto, I portray five curatorial tactics gleaned from secondary source research and first-person interviews with the curators. Drawn from Ezio Manzini’s five concepts on social engagement and from Tim Brown’s conceptual modes of Design Thinking, I argue that a balance of relational intensity between all participants enables empathy; participation is a refusal of the curator’s authority; participants’ openness to the lives of others enriches the participatory experience; embodied experiences produce empathy in participants; and iterative space produces participants’ own sustainable stories as art. Design thinking in curatorial praxis is a catalyst for social change.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it