MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4300021028 · doi:10.25071/1913-5874/37389

Tactics and dissonance: bending social relations towards justice, through art

2016· article· en· W4300021028 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInTensions · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArtistic and Creative Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe artsCognitive dissonancePoliticsSociologySocial justiceStorytellingRepresentation (politics)Social workMedia studiesPsychologySocial scienceVisual artsSocial psychologyPolitical scienceArtLawNarrative

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The idea for this special issue arose out of meetings of the Arts-Centered, Community-Engaged Social Sciences Research (A.C.C.E.S.S.) Collaborative at McMaster University in Hamilton, Canada. Beginning in 2013, a group of faculty and recent graduates began meeting on a regular basis to discuss how, why, under what conditions or with what caveats art enables new social relations. All of us attend to the politics of representation in our work; some of us had specifically analyzed or curated art exhibits; and, many of us also gravitated towards arts-informed practices in our research and teaching. Located in different departments and faculties, we came together to discuss the difference of performance, storytelling, and images in the production of social knowledges as compared to conventional scholarly text.

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 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 categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.895
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.101
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.242 · 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