MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7032958925

Performing the Archives or Performance Art in a Process, Continued: It's on Your Head, It's in Your Head in the Realm of Banff's Acoustic Ecologies

2024· dissertation· en· W7032958925 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University) · 2024
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMedical Coding and Health Information
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRealmEphemeral keyPerformance studiesAgency (philosophy)EthnographyVideo artPublic artContemporary artHistory of art
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Considering its role in the development of Canada, its iconic landscapes and the extensive art production at the Banff Centre, Banff is a significant site of Canadian visual culture requiring further analysis. Technological innovations, grappled with by artists during the latter half of the twentieth century (Michael Century), featured in exhibitions, residencies and on-site DIY radio stations at the Banff Centre in the Eighties and Nineties, culminating in the exhibition, Radio Rethink (1992) at the Walter Phillips Gallery. This thesis challenges how art history incorporates, remembers and contends with ephemeral performance artworks involving live radio transmissions and public interventions. The analysis focuses on an interview between Daina Augaitis, the curator of Radio Rethink (1992), and participating artist, Colette Urban, as regards Urban’s multi-day, performance art walk, It’s on Your Head, It’s in Your Head (1992). Archives of Banff Centre exhibitions, such as, Between Views and Points of View (1991) and As Public As Race (1992), and performance artworks by Cheryl L’Hirondelle, Rebecca Belmore, Margo Kane, Camille Turner and Diana Burgoyne, contextualize Urban’s work within the milieu of art production at the Banff Centre and public performance art in Canada around the turn of the twentieth century. By attempting to intercept, collaborate and respond to the archival interview through site-writing (Jane Rendell) and an interdisciplinary methodology (Katherine McKittrick), this thesis enacts the archive to reconceptualize the way we write about ephemeral works in Canada, and the parameters of artistic and spatial agency in commercially constructed and federally implicated public spaces.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.539
Threshold uncertainty score0.917

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0230.013
Scholarly communication0.0150.004
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0440.008

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 head0.196
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University)Same topicMedical Coding and Health InformationFrench-language works237,207