MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3136099396 · doi:10.7202/1075877ar

Bird and Line

2021· article· en· W3136099396 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Srisrividhiya Kalyanasundaram

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Trumpeter · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt Education and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAestheticsEmbodied cognitionConsciousnessCreativityElement (criminal law)IntersubjectivityPerceptionSpace (punctuation)SentienceSociologyObject (grammar)Natural (archaeology)Mode (computer interface)Visual artsEpistemologyArtPsychologySocial psychologyComputer scienceHistoryPhilosophySocial scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

"Bird and Line" is an artistic inquiry into the relationship between a deep state of artistic consciousness and the act of drawing a line to arrive at the form of a bird. This inquiry further proposes that by using line as a mode of research, the artist begins to perceive the consciousness of a bird and the relationship it shares with its form. For me, the embodied and porous experiences of watching and knowing birds through the practice of working with "line" as an artistic element allow for an intimacy of experiencing and an unfolding of intersubjectivity. Artistic inquiry also acts as an investigation into self-awareness and self-realization in this space of making eco-art. These acts of being lead me into reflections on how perception and creativity are melded together during creative moments to allow for a porous consciousness to emerge and perform the act of drawing a bird. As an artist working with text, movement, and image, I embed questions on the ethics of creativity into how we evolve our lines of art, as well as encounter other beings. By unraveling the relationship between the inner and the outer through Indian aesthetic philosophy, I evolve methods for eco-art practice using line as an element. I emphasize the importance of artistic research with a framework of Indian aesthetics as a way of deepening our perception and relationships with the natural world. This article is written to make artistic processes visible through a reflective auto-ethnographic approach. I write in a non-linear reflective narrative to comprehend cultural ontologies that drive my practice, unfolding internal thought processes, directions of research, and moments of mystical experience.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0050.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe TrumpeterSame topicArt Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207