MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403324967 · doi:10.1177/26349795241289786

Activating smell’s political potential through smellwalk route design

2024· article· en· W4403324967 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lauryn Mannigel, Vicky Sabourin, Christy Spackman

Bibliographic record

VenueMultimodality & Society · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicOlfactory and Sensory Function Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersInstitute for Humanities Research, Arizona State University
KeywordsPoliticsPolitical scienceCommunicationBusinessAestheticsPsychologyArtLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This text unravels the collaborative design approach we—Ph.D. researcher Lauryn Mannigel, science and technology studies scholar Christy Spackman, cultural geographer Kevin McHugh, and visual artist and Studio Arts instructor Vicky Sabourin—used to create the route of a guided smellwalk for Montréal’s Quartier Concordia, exploring the political potential of smell. Drawing from the perspectives of practicing artists who value smell’s ephemerality, contextuality, and materiality, this text outlines the development of the smellwalk route, where we tested Mannigel’s conceptual curiosity in designing a path around the Henry F. Hall building—a building with a contentious political past—and Sabourin’s familiarity with the smells of frequently encountered spaces at Quartier Concordia. By exploring the roles of geographical proximity and distance, spatial familiarity and unfamiliarity, and the recollection of smell experiences—creatively balancing preconceived ideas with chance and pragmatics—our creative process develops a practice-led framework for olfactory encounters and public discussions that may activate the political potential of smell.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.230
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.102 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMultimodality & SocietySame topicOlfactory and Sensory Function StudiesFrench-language works237,207