MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6995060042

Mondegreen

2011· other· en· W6995060042 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueRoyal College of Art Research Repository (Royal College of Art) · 2011
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExhibitionScenographyNarrativeVariety (cybernetics)The artsWhite (mutation)Period (music)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

‘Mondegreen’ was a collaboration between Millar and the Canadian artist Geoffrey Farmer, which took place at Project Arts Centre, Dublin, 7 July–20 August 2011. It took the form of a 'sculpture-play', which ran for approximately nine-and-a-half hours every day, over the entire exhibition run of seven weeks: an attempt to create a new form of performance and exhibition-making. The title ‘Mondegreen’ refers to a mishearing, usually in song lyrics, and the exhibition explored both artists’ fascination with the slippages that occur in the retelling of a story. The story was simple – the replaying of a day the artists spent together supposedly to discuss what they would exhibit – yet drawn into the narrative were a diverse range of characters and cultural acts, from the pedagogical methods of Pythagoras to the chance operations of John Cage; Joyce’s recreation, in Ulysses, of a single day was another obvious influence. Millar gathered research material from diverse sources and selected on the basis of affinities found between them. The gallery’s opening hours were altered to replicate the day the artists spent together. The score’s recital occurred daily, performed by a designated individual who activated the changing scenography and sound components. The ways in which these actions were choreographed was deliberate, established to work between the predefined and the interpretative; a frame creating distance between authorship, control and happenstance. As Isobel Harbison wrote in Frieze (2011), ‘Despite the potential pitfalls of an arranged artist pairing and an exhibition that struck so ambitiously across disciplines, “Mondegreen” succeeded in a variety of ways…Avoiding a wearying exercise in reading on our feet, or another fatiguing object–association sculpture whose common elements remain innocuous and undisclosed, this work was as lucid and generous in fragments as it was in its entirety.’

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.316
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3160.076

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.261 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRoyal College of Art Research Repository (Royal College of Art)French-language works237,207