Bibliographic record
Abstract
CURATING AND THE EDUCATIONAL TURN, PAUL O'NEILL AND MICK WILSON (EDS) (2010) London and Amsterdam: Open Editions and De Appel Arts Centre, 344 pp., ISBN: 978-0-949004-18-5, Paperback, £18.00 RAISING FRANKENSTEIN: CURATORIAL EDUCATION AND ITS DISCONTENTS, KITTY SCOTT (ED.) (2011) Banff and London: The Banff Centre Press and Koenig Books, 112 pp., ISBN: 978-1-894773-32-4 and 978-3-865560-918-2, Paperback, US $24.95 SELECTED MARIA LIND WRITING, BRIAN KUAN WOOD (ED.) (2010) New York: Sternberg Press, 413 pp., ISBN 978-1-934105-18-4, Paperback, US $29.95 WHO CARES? 16 ESSAYS ON CURATING IN ASIA, ALVARO RODRÍGUEZ FOMINAYA AND MICHAEL LEE (EDS) (2010) Hong Kong: Para/Site Art Space with Studio Bibliothèque and seed|projects, 190 pp., ISBN 978-888-98963-9-3, Paperback, HK $80.00 A MATTER OF CLASS: JOHN COTTON DANA, PROGRESSIVE REFORM AND THE NEWARK MUSEUM, CAROL G. DUNCAN (2009) Pittsburgh: Periscope Publishing, 302 pp., ISBN 978-0-8135-4769-5, Hardcover, US $49.95 MADE IN NEWARK: CULTIVATING INDUSTRIAL ARTS AND CIVIC IDENTITY IN THE PROGRESSIVE ERA, EZRA SHALES (2010) New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rivergate Books, 302 pp., ISBN 978-0-8135-4769-5, Hardcover, US $49.95
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.463 | 0.405 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".