MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390819699 · doi:10.1386/jcs_00095_1

Affidamento as Curatorial Methodology: Feminist Approaches to Pedagogy and Curating in the Work of EMILIA-AMALIA

2023· article· en· W4390819699 on OpenAlex
Gabrielle Moser

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Curatorial Studies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicItalian Fascism and Post-war Society
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPraxisSociologyFeminismFeminist philosophyWork (physics)Feminist pedagogyGender studiesPolitical scienceEngineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the possibilities of using the Italian feminist praxis of affidamento , or entrustment, as a curatorial methodology, arguing that it has the capacity to transform galleries into spaces where the generative potential of social differences is foregrounded – rather than repressed – and where intergenerational knowledge, and its attendant affects, can be shared. Reflecting on my role as a founding member of the feminist working group EMILIA-AMALIA, which, since 2016, has organized free film screenings, public talks, collective meals and writing workshops, I chart the ways Italian feminist philosophy has informed the group’s curatorial work and ask whether affidamento offers a model for pedagogical participation within the gallery that recognizes and validates the varied, and often conflicting, needs and desires of generations of feminist practitioners.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.637

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.373
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.077 · 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