Post Atomic: A conversation between Alison Sperling and Anna Volkmar with a visual response by Donald Weber
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>From 2005 until 2007, Canadian photographer Donald Weber spent time around<br />the Chernobyl region in Ukraine, documenting the area and its inhabitants. The<br />result of this is the photographic series Post Atomic (2005-2007). On a late<br />November afternoon, Alison Sperling, a post-doctoral fellow at the ICI (Institute<br />for Cultural Inquiry) in Berlin, and Anna Volkmar, a PhD candidate at Leiden<br />University, engaged in a conversation on these photographs, which functioned<br />as an impulse for a broader reflection on the nuclear era and its conceptual<br />challenges. Faced with a phenomenon that resists comprehension, Sperling and<br />Volkmar deal with ways of challenging popular framings of the nuclear, especially<br />in the so-called ‘exclusion zones’, through different theoretical tools and objects<br />of study. What kind of artistic practices can unshroud the complexity usually<br />associated with the nuclear in popular imaginaries? What potential does the<br />(non-)human body hold to broach the disturbing effects of the nuclear legacy?<br />How can we face and responsibly address the ethical stakes that come with<br />living in and with the nuclear, more than 30 years after the Chernobyl disaster?<br /></p>
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".