MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312653234 · doi:10.7202/1093768ar

Sculpting Nostalgia: Daniel Arsham, Alicja Kwade, and Kathleen Ryan1

2022· article· fr· W4312653234 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIntermédialités Histoire et théorie des arts des lettres et des techniques · 2022
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicNostalgia and Consumer Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMateriality (auditing)PaceCommodificationSculpturePraxisAestheticsArtSociologyVisual artsPolitical scienceLawGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines how the pace of technological progress has continued to accelerate the pace at which nostalgia is conjured and commodified. It undertakes a comparative study of sculptures by three contemporary artists, Daniel Arsham (USA, b. 1980), Alicja Kwade (Poland-Germany, b. 1979), and Kathleen Ryan (USA, b. 1984). While these three artists create and theorize in discretely different modes, their intermedial strategies are thematically linked in their shared leveraging of archaeological praxis and geological materiality vis-à-vis the temporal structure of nostalgia. Their sculptures are important case studies to unpack how nostalgia is culturally mobilized in this specific moment of technological acceleration and the resulting ecological perils of this progress.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.916
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.292 · 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