MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399853578 · doi:10.23974/ijol.2024.vol9.2.364

Extending the Conversation

2024· article· en· W4399853578 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Librarianship · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArtistic and Creative Research
Canadian institutionsLibrary and Archives Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConversationPsychologyCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the dozen or so years of its existence the Artist in Residence (AiR) program at the Art Gallery of Ontario (AGO) has brought numerous emerging and established artists into the daily workings of the museum, inviting resident artists to explore and engage with the AGO’s collections, staff and public programs as they develop their projects. Support for a process of research-creation is fundamental to the opportunity offered by the residency. As a foundational component of the museum’s research infrastructure, the AGO’s Edward P. Taylor Library & Archives has played a key role in the residency program, allowing strategies of reading, citation and documentation to emerge as central themes in the cumulative body of residency projects, and allowing in turn for the possibility of project documentation to enter the archival record of the museum. Drawing on interviews with selected past artists in residence, this paper will provide an account of how the involvement of librarians and archivists, and the availability of library and archival resources in the museum have shaped the trajectory of the AiR program at the AGO.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.243 · 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