Bibliographic record
Abstract
“Living with/on the Land” is a conversation between Jasmine Sihra and Dr. Julie Nagam that explores Nagam’s artistic practice and digital installation works that offer an immersive experience for participants to understand the dualism of living in the city versus on the land. Sihra, a research fellow on Nagam’s SSHRC Partnership Grant The Space between Us, asks about Nagam’s works like Our future is in the land, if we listen to it (2017) that combine projection and sound to provide viewers an immersive experience of the rural Manitoba landscape where the artist grew up. Nagam also discusses singing our bones home (2013), which situates the viewer in a dome-like structure and juxtaposes the architectural dwellings of a wagon shed and a wigwam, a nomadic form that offered more mobility to inhabitants. Her most recent work, A place to hold loss (2022), deals directly with the transformation of land through urban development and suggests mobile forms of dwelling as a possible way to limit destruction of land. Through her practice, Nagam poses urgent questions that have the potential to think through the current climate crisis and Indigenous futurisms.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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".