Bibliographic record
Abstract
“In August of 1988, my grandmother Eileen Garland moved into 1113 Aldea Ave, Ottawa, and discovered a set of photo negatives in one of the bedrooms. Naturally, she had them developed almost immediately and was given a collection of 24 images cataloguing a young persons’ drunken house party. Eileen did not recognize anyone in the photographs, and more confusingly, the interior of 1113 Aldea Ave does not resemble any of the backdrops in the photographs either – which include some classic 1970s finishes, like an absurdly vibrant wallpaper in what appears to be the kitchen.\nSo, we must wonder, who are these people? Where were they photographed? How did the negatives end up in Eileen’s house? And who thought to bring a camera, especially at a time when photographs were permanent, physical objects, rather than the digital files of today? And why did Eileen hold on to these photographs for more than 20 years? This collection of found photography brings forward notions of familiarity, memory, voyeurism, and distance. How do we make meaning from others’ memories, especially those that have been spatially displaced? Agency can be present in images regardless of the identities of the individuals shown, but how do we interpret this agency? How do we make meaning from the faces of those whom we do not know?\nErika DeFreitas’ artworks function to provide another perspective on familiarity and distance. Placing an emphasis on process, gesture, the body, documentation, and paranormal phenomena, she works through attempts to understand concepts of loss, post-memory, inheritance, and objecthood. These profound artworks, paired with the collection of 24 photographs, highlight the play between intended and unintended familiarity, comfort and dissociation, the unremarkable and the uncanny.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.286 | 0.072 |
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".