Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The last decade has seen an upsurge in the study of walking across a number of disciplines; many walking-related events and research groups have been established in the arts and within academia. This two-day conference, held at the University of Sunderland, organised by the research group W.A.L.K. in association with WALK ON, an exhibition at the Northern Gallery of Contemporary Art, aimed to provide a critical and discursive meeting-point for artists, writers, thinkers, and academics engaged in the study of walking, documenting the many diverse approaches to the study of walking. ON WALKING sought to examine and interrogate the practice and process of walking in all its cultural, ethnographic, poetic, and geographical ramifications. It brought together innovative and speculative ideas on walking, considering walking in relation to landscape, social, cultural, artistic, and geographical constructions of space. Over 80 delegates presented papers at the conference. As well as from the UK, they came from as far afield as Canada and North America, South America, France, Spain, Italy, Holland, Hong Kong and Australia.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.005 |
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 it