MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4232854898 · doi:10.18432/r2rp46

imprints

2016· article· en· W4232854898 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mindi Rhoades

Bibliographic record

VenueArt/Research International A Transdisciplinary Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDigital Humanities and Scholarship
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisual artsArtPoetryPrintmakingMeaning (existential)NoticeAssemblage (archaeology)Reading (process)TrilogyClass (philosophy)SPARK (programming language)Ephemeral keySet (abstract data type)AestheticsLiteratureHistoryPsychologyPhilosophyComputer scienceLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This set of poems emerges from the flashpoint at the intersection of art, text, translation, and meaning-making. Several result directly from a class field trip with art educator Terry Barrett’s to the Columbus Museum of Art. We wrote during prolonged interactions with particular pieces. Others result from reflecting on making and remembering. The title of this collection, “imprint,” operates on multiple levels. There is the imprint of the text itself, the prints of the photos, the fictional prints and printmaking referenced, the mental images burned into memory, the lasting impression. There is something magical about trying to translate evanescent ideas, unformed understandings, and ephemeral moments into something more, something lasting, something to keep. These poems represent an attempt to capture something fleeting and slippery also in words. They are an attempt to pause, to contemplate in slower cadence, to ponder the surfeit of signs. They are an attempt to notice, to echo, to share and spark connections. They are an assemblage of images told in fractured pieces, bundled together, and shared.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.718
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.171
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.195 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArt/Research International A Transdisciplinary JournalSame topicDigital Humanities and ScholarshipFrench-language works237,207