Spaces of Care / Photography as Queer Racialized Affective Archives: A Collaborative Project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>This participatory research-creation project brings together the photovoice method and queer personal archives to look at how the ephemeral, feelings-based aspects of queer and trans racialized young people's experiences of 'spaces of care' can be shared through photographmaking. Through the facilitation of four photovoice workshops with three other queer/trans racialized identified young people, each collaborator created 35mm photographs related to the theme 'spaces of care,' culminating in a collective zine. The process of coming together to share ideas, feelings, and experiences is as important as the making of artwork itself. In focusing on the archival possibilities that arise from a qualitative arts-based method (photovoice) that is not typically concerned with issues of the archive, this project simultaneously critiques photovoice and asks: how might affective attachments to spaces of (queer) care, as fundamentally ungraspable and ephemeral experiences, be brought into the queer archive through photographmaking? </p>
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".