Bibliographic record
Abstract
Barbara Bickel and R. Michael Fisher, through their co-creative life-partnership, have composed in their book Art-Care Practices for Restoring the Communal: Education, Co-inquiry, and Healing, a beneficial guide (project) for research, education, academe, and art. They provocatively decentre deep-rooted beliefs in individualism and competition—aspects that dominate today’s academic life, promotion, publishing quotas, and journal rankings. In their thoughtful tarrying, they offer the reader three equally important text sections: “Communidreaming on Theory”; “Spontaneous Creating on Practice”; and “Gestating on Service.” Opening this collective is a detailed glossary, followed by a foreword of poetry, psalm, and photographed process which introduces Bracha Ettinger and her guiding Matrixial theory. Thereafter, Bickel and Fisher’s story of inspiration transports us into their intimate and courageous practice of Spontaneous Creation-Making (SCM) with 35 co-creatives—“an invitational way to make and re-make sense of the troubling times” (p. xxxv) which unfolded during the pandemic and shutdown in North America.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.008 |
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".