Relate North : Practising Place, Heritage, Art & Design for Creative Communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drawing on projects and studies from Canada, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia and Scotland, this volume explores contemporary practices in artbased research and knowledge exchange in the fields of art and design. The contributing authors provide thought-provoking accounts of current practice in these countries. The studies in the book interpret the terms ‘art’ and ‘design’ broadly to include, for instance, place-based art and design; textile crafts; indigenous making and socially engaged art. In addition, authors explore the potential of the disciplines of science and art collaborating on research studies. By focusing on Northern and Arctic perspectives of contemporary arts and design, links are made with issues of heritage, sustainability and culturally-sensitive research. The fourth in the Relate North series, this book brings together the work of leading researchers to explore issues in the field of contemporary art, design, and art-based research. Relate North: Practising Place, Heritage, Art & Design for Creative Communities will be of interest to a wide audience including, for example, anthropologists, geographers, sociologists, artists, designers, art educators, practice-based researchers in addition to those with a general interest in Northern and Arctic issues.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".