MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2975745963 · doi:10.1162/desi_a_00564

Unequal Ideas: Reflections on Designing Politics, an Urban Ideas Competition in Rio de Janeiro

2019· article· en· W2975745963 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDesign Issues · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Industries and Urban Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Endowment for Science Technology and the ArtsYork UniversityLondon School of Economics and Political ScienceAndrew W. Mellon Foundation
KeywordsCompetition (biology)ScholarshipExhibitionPoliticsPower (physics)InequalityColonialismGlobal SouthJurySociologySocial inequalityPolitical sciencePolitical economySocial scienceEconomic geographyGeographyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article initiates a discussion about the unequal geography of the labor that challenges institutions and processes of public scholarship in design. The comparison between the urban competitions in New York, London, and Rio de Janeiro demonstrates that it was only in the Global South that challenges to the technology of the competition were raised. These challenges were based on issues of power imbalances between institutions both within and between the Global North and Global South, and around questions of the social inequalities embedded in the structures of the competition itself (the submissions, the jury, the exhibition). Through this analysis, the article suggests that the burden of labor for decolonizing rests on those already oppressed by systems embedded in the continuous presence of colonialism.

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 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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.722
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.262 · 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