Bibliographic record
Abstract
Desde meados dos anos 2000, assistimos ao surgimento de novas formas de instituições dedicadas à produção, disseminação, preservação e conhecimento de práticas de arte performativa. Embora o desenvolvimento de coleções seja apenas uma atividade periférica nessas organizações, a coleção constitui um território propício à experimentação. Os atores envolvidos interagem com os objetos coletados, materiais ou imateriais, em suas ações artísticas, ou mesmo inventam novas formas de "fazer uma coleção". Propomos a noção de "coleção de fronteira", inspirada na sociologia interativa, a fim de mostrar que a coleção, em regime performático, prossegue e gera formas de cooperação entre diferentes mundos sociais e renova as interações entre seres humanos e objetos. Direcionando nossa atenção na Fondation du doute, no Watermill Center, no Musée de la danse, analisamos as formas de colaboração entre os atores que interagem com estas coleções, as habilidades e referências que são mobilizadas, as ferramentas que são construídas e as formas de conhecimento que são produzidas.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.003 |
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".