MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Disrupting knowledge in the arts: encountering the colonial other through performance

2020· article· en· W3095064034 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical and Radical Social Work · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCONTESTColonialismThe artsRelation (database)ImmigrationSociologyRepresentation (politics)Gender studiesMedia studiesVisual artsPolitical scienceArtLawPoliticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

‘We are not the Others’ is an artful representation of women’s migration stories woven together through a series of spoken vignettes, developed from social work research. This way of seeing lived experience is useful as it enhances knowledge that may not be ascertained in the social work encounter. These learnings provide feedback on services and the hazards of Canada. The article begins with a discussion of the colonial other in relation to migration. Analysis is centred on the questions: how does the performance of the colonial ‘other’ invoke the desire to contest women immigrants’ belonging? How does the display of migration and racialisation grant silent permission to demarcate who belongs? This article takes up how this knowledge is seen and challenged by viewers, which provides insight for social workers into how the terrain of belonging is mediated by racialisation and gender.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.329 · 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