Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: This article draws attention to the evolution of arts integrated research from the academic margins to broader acceptance by documenting the use of arts integrated research within The HOPE Collaboratory, a global initiative pursuing an HIV cure through the block-lock-stop (BLS) strategy. It highlights the HOPE Community Arts Integrated Research (CAIR) program’s role in fostering community engagement, empathy, inclusion, and hope; enhancing scientific communication and public education; and promoting collaborative knowledge creation for reparative and residual research possibilities. Using the Parallaxic Praxis framework, the project demonstrates how art— through poetry, visual installations, social media, and participatory events—makes complex scientific concepts accessible, amplifies the voices of those affected by HIV, and bridges connections among researchers, communities, and the public. As an example, the article also documents the pedagogical and research significance of the Ecosystem chessboard artwork, a permanent exhibit at four international research sites.
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 | 0.011 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.037 | 0.039 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.024 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.073 | 0.013 |
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".