Entanglements Across Time-Space: An Ekphrastic Poetic Response to "Craft, Relational Aesthetics and Ethics of Care" by Belinda MacGill
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following the protocol set out by Fetaui Iosefo (2019, this issue), I sought Belinda’s permission to write an ekphrastic poetic response to her art assemblages since, as Iosefo frames it, “if there was no ethical consent and processing … we would be no different from the colonizers” – just one more shell in my bucket. Like Fetaui, I too am responding to more than just the visuals. The essence of Belinda’s work calls me to the past and allows me to come to a different and broader understanding of my childhood experience, while also functioning as a creative trigger – hallmarks of ekphrastic poetry (Faulkner, 2009). It is only after I received Belinda’s enthusiastic response that I submitted this poetic response.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.066 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".