MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946256230

Post Atomic : A Conversation with Alison Sperling and Anna Volkmar with a Visual Response by Donald Weber

2018· article· en· W2946256230 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ruby de Vos, Kyveli Mavrokordopoulou

Bibliographic record

VenueData Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClimate Change Communication and Perception
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConversationComprehensionSociologyFace (sociological concept)Art historyPsychoanalysisArtVisual artsPsychologySocial sciencePhilosophyCommunicationLinguistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From 2005 until 2007, Canadian photographer Donald Weber spent time around the Chernobyl region in Ukraine, documenting the area and its inhabitants. The result of this is the photographic series Post Atomic (2005-2007). On a late November afternoon, Alison Sperling, a post-doctoral fellow at the ICI (Institute for Cultural Inquiry) in Berlin, and Anna Volkmar, a PhD candidate at Leiden University, engaged in a conversation on these photographs, which functioned as an impulse for a broader reflection on the nuclear era and its conceptual challenges. Faced with a phenomenon that resists comprehension, Sperling and Volkmar deal with ways of challenging popular framings of the nuclear, especially in the so-called ‘exclusion zones’, through different theoretical tools and objects of study. What kind of artistic practices can unshroud the complexity usually associated with the nuclear in popular imaginaries? What potential does the (non-)human body hold to broach the disturbing effects of the nuclear legacy? How can we face and responsibly address the ethical stakes that come with living in and with the nuclear, more than 30 years after the Chernobyl disaster?

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 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)0.001
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.589
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueData Archiving and Networked Services (DANS)Same topicClimate Change Communication and PerceptionFrench-language works237,207