MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311627865 · doi:10.1177/14703572221111804

The optometry of visual communication: the Museum of Vision Science

2022· article· en· W4311627865 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

VenueVisual Communication · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicVisual Culture and Art Theory
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVision scienceConversationVisual artsSociologyHistory of sciencePoint (geometry)OptometryArtMedicineComputer scienceEpistemologyCommunicationArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article uses the Museum of Vision Science and other museums of optometry as an entry point for considering the science of seeing and the seeing of science. The Museum of Vision Science, the only optometric museum in Canada, is part of an optometry school. The placement of the Museum of Vision Science within an optometry school perhaps harkens back to 19th-century examples of professional schools and museums, and this article suggests ways the museum could offer a dynamic approach to humanities understandings of vision within a science curriculum. But, more broadly, this article uses the case study of the Museum of Vision Science to consider larger possibilities for visual communication studies in conversation with optometry. Although the museum situates itself as one of vision science, it also offers a complicated ‘cultural’ history of vision. The author bridges questions of the hegemony of vision science with the practice of visual communication studies.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.920
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.326 · 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