Embodied creativity in the fine and performing arts
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Creativity studies has focused on creative thinking processes, problem-solving, and innovation, while the embodied dimensions of creativity have remained a tangential thread. In part, this is due to the challenge of running original, quantitative experiments in the embodied and performing arts. At a more paradigmatic level, it is also due to the valuing of cognition over embodiment that continues to structure academia and creativity studies. Not running counter to cognitive creativity, but interconnected with it, embodied creativity includes creative expressions and processes that emphasize or are generated by the physical body. It is a view of creativity that highlights physical responses within creative practice and is attentive to the influences of space, environment, materials, and the individual's relationships to other bodies. The fine and performing arts are exemplary places to study embodied creativity, and 4E cognition theory can assist in describing how and where embodied creativity exists. This article argues for embodied creativity as an important place of study that can move creativity studies toward decoloniality.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it