Bibliographic record
Abstract
Solo show at Or Gallery, Vancouver, British Columbia \nExhibition included 5 photographic works, 2 publications and film installation/ screening performance. \n \nPrinciples & Deceptions addresses the artist’s focus on copying, repetition, and theft through the presentation of her film Hidden in Plain Sight (2015) alongside a series of photographic excerpts from her bookwork The Overcoat (2015). \n \nHidden in Plain Sight, originally commissioned by L’Été Photographique de Lectoure in Toulouse, re-presents short excerpts from Robert Bresson’s film Pickpocket (1959). For The Overcoat, a bookwork published by Four Corners Press in London, Dobai contributes a series of photographs of commercial display windows and vitrines that are placed in conversation with Nikolai Gogol’s 1842 novella of the same name, in which the protagonist works as a copyist. \n \nThere will be a special performance at the opening reception, where the presentation of Dobai’s film work Hidden in Plain Sight will be accompanied by a live reading.
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 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.059 | 0.027 |
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".