Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this video we see an actor dressed as a lawyer, standing in a vast white space. He interprets a script composed of legal terms from a commercial contract. The details of the contract have been omitted, leaving a list of words such as ‘contract’, ‘parties’, ‘tender’ and ‘service’. The actor delivers the words one by one, starting ‘in character’ as a lawyer, before creating multiple interpretations through gesture, style and characterisation. The piece questions whether the lawyer’s legal identity, and that of the law itself, can be seen as a mere surface to be changed or dissolved at will. The performativity inherent to the courtroom is used as a way to question the assumed objectivity of the law, with the actor’s multiple interpretations instead suggesting an inherent subjectivity. The piece, which inhabits the form of a contract, explores law as a conceptual space, with the actor’s moving body suggesting a typographic form against the abstract whiteness of the backdrop. Solo exhibitions of this work include Migros Museum (Zurich 2013), Paula Cooper Gallery (New York, 2010), The Power Plant (Toronto, 2009), Museum of Art, Rhode Island School of Design (Providence, 2009), and Eastside Projects (Birmingham 2010 and tour to Cornerhouse, Manchester and mima, Middlesbrough.) Group exhibitions include World as Stage, nbk, Berlin, 2009 (exh. cat). The piece was featured three times in Artforum, reviewed in Art Monthly and Frieze (online); discussed in publications Carey Young, monograph, pub. Migros Museum/JRP Ringier (2013), Permanent Mimesis, exh. cat., pub. Electa Mondadori/GAM, Turin, 2010, and The World as Stage, Neue Berliner Kunstverein / Walter Konig. 2010; discussed in artist talks at venues including Centre Pompidou and the Miami Art Museum and within leading conferences at Tate Modern, Jan van Eyck Academy, Maastricht and Irish Museum of Modern Art, Dublin.
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 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.129 | 0.019 |
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".