Critical Climate Machine: A Visual and Musical Exploration of Climate Misinformation through Machine Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Critical Climate Machine is a cutting-edge media art installation that critically exposes and quantifies mechanisms of climate change misinformation. Utilizing computational aesthetics across data, imagery, and sound, this work processes real-time data from X (Twitter) through a natural language processing learning model derived from cognitive sciences. It not only renders the statistical aspects of this data visually but also manifests its thermal effects. A unique audio dimension is introduced through dialogues between climate skeptics and climate advocates, processed by the generative machine learning (ML) algorithm Dicy2. These elements collectively shape the installation, each unveiling its distinctive algorithmic aesthetics and technical underpinnings. This paper concentrates on the dual application of ML algorithms: one for dissecting extensive online misinformation streams, and the other for creating climate-related dialogues. This dual approach opens a discussion on the mediation of climate, at the convergence of computational and physical realms. Our aim is to critically examine the role of ML technologies in crafting aesthetic experiences that resonate within scientific discourse and public debate on climate issues.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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".