Editorial: Issue 116: Collections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The impul to collect i one hared by arti cs and patrons of art alike.The gathering and organizing of idea , experiences, object , word and/or image form the ba i of every arti c' work.The art collector ha a imilar commitment, engaging with arti cs' material outputs reflectively and sympathetically, there by participating in the experience and idea they conjure.When it come co contempo rary art, both arti t and collector are unifi ed in reflecting upon and crying to under rand what it means to be in the world today.In chi i sue, we examine the artist-collector, who organizes and curates objects as part of hi or her material output, and the patron collector, who i motivated by plea ure, curioity, and ometimes financial peculation.Complementing an artist project by Charle Scankievech, Pandora Syperek writes about chat artist' work made in the far North of Canada and in Marfa, Texa , which ex plore the Cold War era, Minimali m and Moderni m through an engagement with artifact from popular culture, modern art and de ign.Engaging imilar method , Sophie Springer survey a number of book work and con iders how they operate a mobile and inexpen ive exhibition pace through which collections of artwork , object , images and idea can be curated.Al o on the theme of the arti t as collector, Laura Kenin writes about arti t who create sculptural installations uing outdated media, including record album , VHS tape , discarded computers and ho pica! equipment.The e artists work a collector , curators and editor , often placing already-Cu6 Winter 2012.
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 | 0.005 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.016 | 0.017 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.168 | 0.132 |
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".