Spreadable Action: Mapping Connections between the Arts and Action Research through an Arts-Based Research Exhibition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many Canadian immigrant seniors living independently in Canada face unique challenges such as language barriers, adjusting to a new culture, and isolation from friends and family. Within the context of the COVID-19 pandemic these issues have become more complicated. This article explores a form of arts-based research (ABR) as an inquiry into ways that COVID-19 has impacted immigrant seniors in Vancouver, Canada. We situate our inquiry within action research (AR) and explore new methodological possibilities stimulated by merging artistic engagement within the inquiry. Our research is mobilized through two gallery exhibitions of Letters to COVID: an invitation to visually reflect on seniors’ experiences. We consider what we might do to facilitate support for these citizens, inviting the public to rethink perceptions and strategies of social inclusion and support for immigrant seniors living independently in Canada.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.023 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.021 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".