MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6908457976 · doi:10.26188/13298579

C+AARP INSIDE|OUTSIDE Response 1, 2020

2020· book· en· W6908457976 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2020
Typebook
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt Education and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLiminalityVisual arts educationArt schoolMetropolitan areaThe artsFine artArt criticismContemporary artProvocation testAudience response

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This C+AARP COVID 2020 collection holds the responses to the first and second artful works developed to the provocation INSIDE|OUTSIDE. Designed and curated by teacher candidate, Ella Konrad East who has developed an a/r/tographic pedagogical piece for teaching and learning. The ‘Child+Adult Art Response Project' (C+AARP) (Watkins & Coleman, 2019) involves child artists in a small number of primary schools in metropolitan and regional Victoria, Australia practicing with adult artists in the Master of Teaching (Visual Arts and Design) at the Melbourne Graduate School of Education (MGSE). They visually and textually respond to INSIDE|OUTSIDE as a conceptual, pedagogical and material provocation with each artwork shared as an art encounter. Watkins, M. & Coleman, K.S. (2019). An Artful Experiment: The Child+Adult Art Response Project. InSEA World Congress Proceedings; Vancouver, U.B.C. 10.24981/2020-1 Watkins, M., Grant, R., Coleman, K., & Meager, N. (2019). Entering the liminal through the side door: A “Child+Adult Art Response Project” as portal for student voice and deep thinking. In Coutts, G (Ed.). Torres de, T (Ed.). Learning Through Art: Lessons for the 21st Century?, (1), pp.178-178. InSEA. 10.24981/978-lta2018-15

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.788
Threshold uncertainty score0.302

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.7880.738

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.172 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicArt Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207