Bibliographic record
Abstract
dot-store is the work of artists, Jon Thomson & Alison Craighead, and is an attempt to utilise an e-shop environment as a context within which a series of artworks can be delivered both on and offline. From Autumn 2002 until Autumn 2005, dot-store produced and sold a range of low cost "vintage" products that self-consciously reference both the history of the world wide web and the popular explosion of mobile communications in the 1990's. For its launch on September 18th 2002, dot-store products included tea towels, temporary tattoos, lenticular badges, mobile phone ringtones, operator logos and a sound effects audio CD. In addition to running the on-line shop, the artists also presented these premature relics in institutional contexts either as stallholders at artfairs, or as installations in galleries –the latter being not unlike past installations of the Canadian artist group General Idea (for example.) dot-store is particularly interested in drawing attention to the blurring of public & private spaces online, and the increasing overlap between personal narratives & corporate interest. This blurring particularly manifests itself in the Homepage Culture and structures like the Amazon Associates Scheme, where personal testimony becomes mixed with endless advertisements, or the memorial site of a loved one becomes the mechanism by which goods are sold. dot-store, as with other work by Thomson & Craighead, makes reference to how technology changes the way we perceive the world around us.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.783 | 0.672 |
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".