Prisoners of Love: Affect, Containment and Alternative Futures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Contribution short abstract: \nHow might artists work to enliven and renew relations with objectified and sequestered museum items through material, digital, affective and discursive responses? We took from the ethos of Hui’s cosmotechnics to bring transnational artists in connection with past and present material practices. \n \nContribution long abstract: \nThe 2022-24 project, Prisoners of Love: Affect, Containment and Alternative Futures (PoL) aimed to connect material lodged in UK museums with dispersed home peoples, enabling artists, curators and researchers, from UK based diasporic communities, First Nations, Canada, Ghana and India, among others, to respond to complex histories, cosmological ideas, and material practices linking Europe, the Americas, Africa and Asia. \n \nFraming our methodology around ‘virtual visits’, we aimed to bring participants into museum collection stores, to develop techniques to improve the experience of virtual interactions, and to facilitate the sharing of knowledge, data and distributed art practices through conversation, research, reflection, and responses in the form of artworks, story and theory. By digitising, 3D printing and working with augmented reality as well as more traditional making processes, we sought to position archival material within contemporary technological frameworks that would also be reflective of the complexity of the thinking and practices enshrined in older approaches. \n \nHighlighting our commitment to collaborative working, we brought together Hastings Museum & the Blackfoot Nation Mootookakio’ssin Project, Canada; Horniman Museum & Compound 13 Lab in Dharavi, India; Pitt Rivers Museum, Oxford & The University of Ghana Archaeology Department. At the Economic Botany Collection at Kew, we demonstrated computational photography techniques and visited with material from Zimbabwe in order to facilitate future networks that might enable us to further develop the four process based exhibitions we curated in the UK and Canada during the project period.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".