MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3168121714 · doi:10.4000/erea.11940

Imaging the Climate Crisis. The Ceramic Art of Horie, Galloway, Snider, and Rhymer-Zwierciadlowska

2021· article· en· W3168121714 on OpenAlexaff
Mary Ann Steggles

Bibliographic record

VenueE-rea · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClimate Change Communication and Perception
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaManitoba Hydro
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCivilizationAestheticsHistorySociologyEnvironmental ethicsVisual artsArtArchaeologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This contribution focuses on four contemporary ceramists who believe that art can be a vehicle for social change. The climate emergency informs the work of Ayumi Horie, Julia Galloway, Amy Snider, and Julianna Zwierciadlowska-Rhymer. Each desires to create a dialogue with the viewer and to incite positive environmental action. Horie began The Democratic Cup in 2016. She adapted the concept in 2018 to bring people with divergent views of the environment together for civil discussions in four different cities of Minnesota. Galloway was so shocked at the decapitation of the Wandering Albatross and its near extinction that she set about to create classical funerary urns to draw attention to the endangered species of New England. Amy Snider’s objects concern the world’s melting glaciers and the climate crisis that is causing their disintegration. Julianna Zwierciadlowska-Rhymer’s sculptural installations explore society’s relationship with food. She creates banquet tables of beautifully crafted cakes on their delicate pedestal holders to call attention to both the extravagance and waste of living in the twenty-first century as well as the treatment of animals and food additives.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.012
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0000.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.195
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueE-reaSame topicClimate Change Communication and PerceptionFrench-language works237,207