Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research background: There has been a significant rise in group-based and collective art practice that challenges conventional methodologies and ideas of individual authorship in art. Dr Laresa Kosloff, Associate Professor Andy Thomson and Anthony Cribb produced a collaborative artwork for the exhibition Weakforce4. This artwork consisted of three large-scale immersive sculptures (500cm high and 400cm in diametre), and a video work (10 mins looped duration), which was presented on an LDC monitor. Research contribution: Important / not important humourously deconstructs ideas related to exhibition support material, "artistic authorship" and the artist persona. The artists created three large-scale immersive sculptures within the gallery space, which viewers could physically enter. These sculptures were humourously contextualised by mock interviews recorded to video by the collaborating artists. The artists express differing attitudes and conceptual appraisal of their work, highlighting subjective bias and the contextual basis of art. Important / not important humourously explores the psychological and relational basis of artistic production in relation to supplementary narration and sculptural form. Research significance: The significance of this research is that the collaborating artists were able to extend their practices through a project that used humour and ironic parody to explore the relational basis of art making. Thomson, Cribb and Kosloff's collaboration was part of a broader presentation of group-based artworks, participatory events and performances orchestrated by UFT (Unified Field Theory) for the exhibition Weakforce4. Associate Professor Andy Thomson and Dr Laresa Kosloff are core members of UFT, a visual arts organisation that has produced exhibitions in Canada, the UK, Korea and New Zealand to date.
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 | 0.018 | 0.156 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.154 | 0.052 |
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".