MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7044206905

View from up here: the Arctic at the center of the world

2016· other· en· W7044206905 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInsight (University of Cumbria) · 2016
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExhibitionVisionArcticThe arcticSculptureRepresentation (politics)AnthropocentrismThe artsPerspective (graphical)Environmental art
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The outside view of the Arctic is of a place of mythic notions and proportions. Many consider it wild, remote, and untouched, unattainable—a place only few would occupy by choice. It is the place of the Aurora, polar bear, narwhal, 24-hour light and 24-hour darkness, ice, and other things that seem fantastical, romantic and mysterious. The North has long been a land of dreams, realized and unrealized, attracting explorers, scientists, and artists. View From Up Here: The Arctic at the Center of the World is an international contemporary art exhibition that highlights contemporary investigations into the Arctic through the perspective of artists. The exhibition conveys a complexity of place and people through film, photographs, installations, and sculptures that highlight Arctic cultures, landscape, scientific research, and visions of the future. Participating artists include: Nicholas Galanin (Alaska), Anna Hoover (Alaska/Washington), Jeroen Toirkens (Holland), Derek Coté (Michigan), Marek Ranis (North Carolina), Christoph Kapeller (California), Paul Walde (Canada), John Grade (Washington), Magali Daniaux and Cedric Pigot (France), Mary Mattingly (New York), Annesofie Norn (Denmark), Bryndis Snæbjörnsdóttir and Mark Wilson (Iceland/England). Bryndis Snæbjörnsdóttir and Mark Wilson conduct their collaborative practice from bases in the north of England and Reykjavík, Iceland. With a strong research grounding, their socially engaged projects explore contemporary relationships between human and non-human animals in the contexts of history, culture and the environment. Their practice sets out to challenge anthropocentric systems and thinking that sanction loss through representation of the other, proposing instead, alternative tropes of "parities in meeting." Their work is installation based, using objects, text, photography and video. In Norway and Alaska they are researching the architecture of polar bear dens to develop a major video and installation work. 
\n
\nArtist statement: During a residency in Svalbard we focused on the maternity dens of polar bears in Svalbard – being as they are, a perfectly adapted model for habitat in the arctic environment. We are particularly interested in the specific architecture and ergonomics of these structures, so in addition to our discussions with biologists we’d appreciate an understanding of their functionality from the perspective of physicists. In the late 60’s and 70’s research into polar bear dens was conducted in a much more physical way than today where DNA samples supposedly give answers to many of the questions asked about the animal and its habitat. Despite this, scientists still take measurements and photograph the dens as well as mapping them using GPS technology. Thus, given the right circumstances, it is not difficult to visit a den having been given the exact location. The maternity den however does not last long and is often occupied again by other polar bears for different purposes (harborage etc.) than to hibernate and give birth. The Polar Bear species is under threat from global warming, largely through the depletion of ice and shortened winters. Through this study we will look for examples of adaptation to changing environmental circumstance as a basis for contemplation and re-appraisal of accepted knowledge, through the processes of discussion with experts in the field, empirical enquiry and ultimately, art-driven initiatives. It is thus our belief that by recreating the den in the way we propose will produce truer and more holistic image of this unique animal and its environment than the endless flow of polar bear images that are more prone to misrepresent the animal and its nature, than give a realistic view. It is after all, impossible for us to imagine the polar bear experience without anthropomorphizing – and turning the animal erroneously by default into a domesticated creature either through the photographic image, the cuddly toy or the stuffed specimen.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.183
Threshold uncertainty score0.611

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0100.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1830.038

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInsight (University of Cumbria)French-language works237,207