Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article pulls from the lecture-performance presented at Circus and its Others (CaiO) in Bogotá, Colombia, in February/March 2024 by Dana Dugan –an American artist-scholar, independent artist, and PhD candidate at Concordia University, Montreal, QC. The embodied component of this performance-lecture is not included aside from some photos from the research-creation process. The lecture-performance itself as performance artist and scholar weaves embodied text with the written word. The primary content of this article constitutes the rendering of an embodied performance through a text of the polyvalent ‘voices’ entangled with the sensorial, material experience of the performance. This experimental/unconventional article attempts to bring the writing body to the page and do justice to the blurred lines between the conceptual and the embodied of research-creation and this lecture performance. The task at hand proves challenging reconciling the compression from the three to the two-dimensional linear mediums and all the thick sensory, ephemeral, and affective engagement, the richness of the in-betweens, the cracks, the somatic responses, performance mishaps, stutters, sneezes, laughter, umms, awkward silences, sighs, ho-hums, etc. of the experience itself that escapes written language. A picture is a thousand words. But so is smell, taste, touch, and hearing. How might the performance component of the lecture performance be honored and given fair tribute and provide words to the ineffable? How do we make the embodied performance, text, and how does the text become the embodied performance? The article’s unfolding attempts to do just that. The content, structurally, and grammatically of this article is experimentally contoured through the weaving of both theory and practice showcasing the self-perpetuating movement between the theoretical and practical in research-creation. Research-creation becomes a mindful intersection of the body and writing that, in the case of the umbrella research-creation project BLAKshēp, which encompasses m/OTHER-ing: Dubble Duch at WERK, relies heavily on the body as the primary tool for investigation and knowledge production. Specific to this article, neologisms derived from conceptual modulations as lines of flight that move throughout the article concepts include: m/OTHER-ing WERK or W-E-R-K CUNT-fabulation Ethics of care CUNT-time
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".