On Walking: rhythm, repetition, movement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On Walking: rhythm, repetition, movement (March 16-27, 2022) is an exhibition which includes three emerging artists and one collective whose works evolve through a practice of walking. Together, they explore personal and geopolitical readings of space, using walking as a method to measure oneself against a place and interrogate the different ways we can foster expansive connections, create a sense of belonging and examine the imprints that we leave behind as we pass through our surroundings. Artists Naomi Boyd, Anita Cazzola, Abedar Kamgari and the Roving Designers Collective use activities of remembering, tracing, and gathering to propose new ways of seeing and interacting with the world. Through walking, their works layer everyday encounters and interactions to uncover patterns of movement and investigate the porosity of urban spaces. Boyd, Cazzola, and Kamgari expand on these ideas and walk to interrogate their own subjectivities and relationships to land, as settlers and guests in the place now known as Canada. The walking prompts by the Roving Designers Collective invite audiences to actively participate and transform our individual and collective relationships to place through moments of acute awareness and creative reflection.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 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; 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".