MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3213629871

Poppies, Cultures, and Arts

2021· article· en· W3213629871 on OpenAlexaffabout
Xiaomei Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueStudent Research Proceedings · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt Education and Development
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisual artsSymbol (formal)The artsMeaning (existential)Fine artArtPsychologyComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As people know, the different cultures have influenced the art creation. Canadian artists prefer to paint roses, sunflowers, lilies, and poppies, while Chinese artists like to draw lotuses, peonies, orchids, and winter sweet. As Canadians know, the flower poppies are the symbol of remembrance and most welcome to present in the artwork. However, seldom Chinese artists paint poppies and exhibit their artwork of poppies. My creative research is to discuss why the meaning of poppies is different within different cultures, why I chose poppies, and how I create artwork of poppies with Chinese materials in the traditional way. Department: Art and Design Faculty Mentor: Elisabeth Belliveau

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.618
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.188
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudent Research ProceedingsSame topicArt Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207