Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interactive digital video installation that explores the potential impact of face transplants on appearance and identity. Other relevant details:\n\nThis research project explores the facial expression of human identity. Cover Story draws on 'real life' experiences of people\n\nwith facial differences and questions what the idea of living without a viable face means. This three-part video installation\n\nexamines the role of the face in human communication and dynamically investigates the implications of a face that cannot\n\nexpress identity or emotion.\n\nControversial issues relating to facial appearance and loss of facial identity are here raised in accessible and non-threatening\n\nways suitable to a public site cutting across art, science and public contexts.\n\nThe installation was derived from research into the experience and science of facial disfiguration conducted with leading experts\n\nincluding interviews with women with severe facial disfigurements, cosmetic plastic surgeons and transplant teams. The\n\ninteractive element of the installation involved innovative facial modelling using specially developed software. The project\n\ninvolved technical research into the creation of a real-time interactive avatar and technical support from UCL, with some advice\n\nfrom University of Surrey.\n\nFirst seen in the context of a publicly sited art/science exhibition and especially created for BA Festival of Science 2006, the\n\nCover Story installation offers new and accessible ways of thinking about face transplants, a contentious issue in medical\n\nscience. The project has been presented in different forms: a gallery installation (Norwich, 2006, three artist show -\n\ncommissioned alongside Keith Piper and Simon Tegala with grant from Wellcome Trust), a forthcoming exhibition at\n\nFotofestival, Zaragoza, Spain, (2008); a conference presentation (University of Toronto, 2007). The project has led to ongoing\n\ncollaboration with Royal Free Plastic Surgery Unit to document a patient’s experience of a face transplant.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
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".