MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Kosloski’s Kashub Commodities? Authenticity and Value Creation in Wilno Furniture

2020· article· en· W3095495158 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joshua C. Blank

Bibliographic record

VenuePolish American Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt History and Market Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntiqueEphemeraObject (grammar)Value (mathematics)Common value auctionVisual artsAdvertisingArtBusinessComputer scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We often attach value to the ephemera and objects we collect, especially if there are personal connections or nostalgic importance attached to the items. Over time, some items in a collection become more valuable and desirable than others. Among Canadian antique collectors, one such object of desire is a late nineteenth-century blanket box. Made by a few craftsmen who came from Prussian-occupied Poland and settled near the small hamlet of Wilno, Ontario, Canada, these boxes were originally valued for their function. But many surviving ones were scooped up in the 1960s and 1970s by pickers. Subsequently, they were featured prominently in books, magazines, and antique auctions, and their value increased dramatically. To unpack the life history of and value associated with the Wilno blanket box, this article utilizes an object biography approach. It seeks out transnational connections to Europe and analyzes the object in the physical, technical, economic, and social realms. It also shows how interactions between objects and people contribute to value creation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.014
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.228 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolish American StudiesSame topicArt History and Market AnalysisFrench-language works237,207