MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313303997 · doi:10.32920/ifmj.v2i4.1682

Un/interactive Fish in Posthuman Ethical Design

2022· article· en· W4313303997 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

VenueInteractive Film and Media Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInnovative Human-Technology Interaction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPosthumanFish <Actinopterygii>PosthumanismEmbodied cognitionComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionPsychologyArtificial intelligenceFishery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the posthuman era, what counts as ethical has dispersed and re-distributed to a nonhuman-centered network that includes nonhuman species and nonliving matter. This paper serves as a resistance and a possible way out against traditional human-pet ownership in therapeutic robot development. The paper consists of research and project-based speculative design that aims to recalibrate human relationships with others through the public interactive project Not-my-fish. In the project Not-my-fish, the others include fish, digital fish, and computers. The project is developed in a healthcare facility setting to offer an alternative healthcare modality with un-interactive interaction and flow as core concepts. The overarching research question is: what would a human-nonhuman relationship look like through the lens of Taoist-posthumanism, and how do we design such a relationship? More practically, how to create a mutually beneficial interactive system with limited human-initiated interaction in human-computer interaction? Firstly, I draw on Posthumanism, Taoism, and Contractualism as theoretical frameworks to form the foundation regarding the human-fish relationship. Second, I analyze and transcribe the theories into the project Not-my-fish in terms of un-interactive interaction. Third, I apply the concept of flow as design guidelines and feature four aspects of the flow in the human-fish interaction: ecological flow (the physical surroundings of the human-fish interaction), sensory flow (the physical senses and perception of humans and fish), social flow (the shared and unique social behavior of humans and fish), and data flow (the system’s memory load and data lifecycle). Fourth, I discuss how the participating parties, such as human individuals, computer-simulated fish, and institutional partners, could mutually benefit from this partnership. The project Not-my-fish rearticulates the relationship between humans and fish and humans and computers. It views the human-fish relationships from posthuman and Taoist perspectives to detach the idea of human-nonhuman ownership and promote reciprocity and equilibrium. Nevertheless, some challenges are presented for human partners and design aspects regarding the transition from human-centered to posthuman interactive media. However, this paper demonstrates a practical way for human society to develop a posthuman design in public interactives and serve the public good at the same time.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
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 score0.350
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.265 · 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