Autour du Dessin; Drawing Conversations, UQAM Design Centre, Montreal: Invited Exhibition Curated by Carole Lévesque and Thomas-Bernard Kenniff
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drawing Conversations Drawing Conversations is an invitation to talk about drawing, through drawing. Presented at UQAM’s Design Centre, this exhibition brings together the work of 16 architects and academics in an exchange on contemporary drawing practices in architecture. The exhibition leads us to consider drawing beyond its qualities as a graphic object to glimpse the open conversation it sets up, a dialogue that is as much individual, with oneself as a practitioner, as it is collective, with other drawings, people and practices. Both grounded in the real world and in a world-in-making, each drawing and each conversation is an opportunity to explore different techniques, to trace possible worlds, to play with words, to give way to fantastical fabulations, to engage in poetic exchanges about the world, about the practice of drawing, about architecture, about those who draw. The exhibition originates from the meeting between the curators, Carole Lévesque and Thomas-Bernard Kenniff, and the Drawing Architecture research project initiated by Riet Eeckhout and Arnaud Hendrickx of KU Leuven university in Belgium. The project convened biannual meetings between a group of renowned international practitioners, offering them the opportunity to discuss their drawing practice. In a world premiere, Drawing Conversations offers a pause on these encounters by foregrounding their collective interrogation through drawings put in conversation. The exhibition expands on these encounters by focusing on the capacity of drawing to engage reflection on modes of representation, design practices and research fields, and the role of this reflection in the construction of a common world. It focuses on the collective exercise of interrogation and develops around drawing as a mechanism of interaction.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.121 | 0.011 |
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".