Upbeat, commissioned by Canary Wharf for the Riverside Steps to celebrate Pride Month 2022 in London
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Upbeat on the Riverside Steps by Lothar Götz, 2022 The risers of these three flights of steps up this staircase are divided into facetted coloured lozenges or triangles arranged into squares, the colours coming from the Progress Pride Rainbow flag – celebrating the LGBTQ+ Pride in London festival. I imagine the work, formed of coloured shapes, akin to the pattern on a technicolour version of a red carpet, laid out as an upbeat celebration of all the progress made in that LGBTQ+ rights – and almost like the colours on a disco dance floor. However the geometric shapes include pink triangles which reference the badges that gay people had to wear – and the oppression they had to suffer – in Nazi concentration camps. The triangular, lozenged patterning also picks up on the forms of the surrounding architecture, visible as you ascend the steps: from the triangular rooftop cap to the 1991 One Canada Square, designed by architect César Pelli to the the criss-cross filigree façade of the more recent 2020 residential tower designed by Horden Cherry Lee Architects.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.357 | 0.138 |
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".