MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Conversational Threads: Teaching, Making, & Mothering

2019· article· en· W2966577689 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer K. Combe, Kit Grauer

Bibliographic record

VenueVisual Arts Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArtistic and Creative Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIconCitationThe artsDownloadPublishingLibrary scienceWorld Wide WebComputer scienceSociologyVisual artsArtLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research Article| July 01 2019 Conversational Threads: Teaching, Making, & Mothering Jennifer Combe; Jennifer Combe University of Montana Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Kit Grauer Kit Grauer Professor Emerita, The University of British Columbia Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Visual Arts Research (2019) 45 (1): 41–45. https://doi.org/10.5406/visuartsrese.45.1.0041 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Permissions Search Site Citation Jennifer Combe, Kit Grauer; Conversational Threads: Teaching, Making, & Mothering. Visual Arts Research 1 January 2019; 45 (1): 41–45. doi: https://doi.org/10.5406/visuartsrese.45.1.0041 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All Scholarly Publishing CollectiveUniversity of Illinois PressVisual Arts Research Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. Copyright 2019 by the Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois2019 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.422

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.005
Scholarly communication0.0140.011
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1260.040

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 head0.227
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.236 · 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
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVisual Arts ResearchSame topicArtistic and Creative ResearchFrench-language works237,207