MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4300002054 · doi:10.29173/pandpr29524

Lange-Weile

2022· article· en· W4300002054 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
K Hock

Bibliographic record

VenuePhenomenology & Practice · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicVisual Culture and Art Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhenomenonAestheticsPerceptionEmbodied cognitionMode (computer interface)Process (computing)InterdependenceEpistemologyPhenomenology (philosophy)SociologyPerspective (graphical)Visual artsArtPsychologyComputer sciencePhilosophyHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using lens- and time-based media — photography and very still moving image — the artistic research practice presented here as ‘phenomenological notes’ aims to bring to the foreground that which might be familiar and is easily overlooked. The presupposed perception of the phenomenon of nature is destabilized and put into question through a process of lens-based durational observation, stretching that which is thought to be known, allowing for the opening of other understandings of nature to emerge. The aim is for these phenomena to be re-seen through closely engaging with what surrounds us and through a process of elongated looking that leads to different modes of seeing and recollecting.
 The practice itself comprises two distinct, seemingly opposed but interdependent parts of the overall making process: one foregoes the other which is essential for the other one to evolve. These parts are referred to as modes of attention. The first mode of attention demonstrates a more active form of being in a space: the artist actively moves, seeks, and collects. Following on from this, a less active mode is taken up: the artist becomes more receptive, lets the world reveal and unfold itself in front of the lens. The three pieces of work presented — Stille Fragmente, Leaves, Ice melting — give expression to these two modes of attention, and also show how the work has evolved throughout ‘time’. As the work has developed, the process of looking has become more and more distilled, lending more attention to the idea of duration, a concept that might be somewhat contentious to discuss via a medium so clearly associated with clock-time.
 The decision has been made to trust the agencies of the artifacts themselves produced by this process: not to explain but to frame the phenomenon, to destabilize the pre-established understanding of the phenomenon of nature.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.919
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhenomenology & PracticeSame topicVisual Culture and Art TheoryFrench-language works237,207