Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this common urban landscape, developing through privatization, segregation, gentrification and commercialization, an artist searches for public space. She finds it by turning vacant buildings into collaborative workshops, imagining alternative spaces and crossing urban boundaries. With the crucial help of many local citizens joining in the collaboration, together they make their own sense of what “public” means. All of their interventions are transitory, like the city is itself. Consequently, the work is never done. This book provides insight into how the (Dis)placed Interventionsart project came about, what happened along the way and what lives on. Elly Van Eeghem raises questions concerning the role of the arts in urban development and notions of artistic sustainability, authorship, autonomy and cooperation. The book is intended for students and professionals working in the fields of art, urbanism and community work. By extension, it is written for everyone who is interested in contributing to our urbanized living environment. From 2012 to 2018, Elly Van Eeghem worked on (Dis)placed Interventions, a project connecting local experiences of urban development in Western cities to her hometown Ghent in Belgium. She created a series of documentary videos focusing on the urban development of the Quartier des Fleurs in Asnières-sur-Seine, Paris (2012), the Horseshoe Estate in Neukölln, Berlin (2014) and the Town of Mount Royal & Park Extension, Montreal (2016). These documentaries where shown in socially and/or physically related neighbourhoods in Ghent, as starting points for various collaborative projects with local residents: a community meeting place (Cinema Forum, 2013), a utopic housing unit (MLM–001, 2015) and a design studio for public space (CAMPUS, 2017).
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.002 |
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".