Sanded steps, standing over stones (2017, 2018) [REF2021 collection]
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
Sanded Steps, Standing Over Stones is a live art work that rethinks ‘trace’ and ‘event’ in historical––and ongoing aporetic––situations that become self-effacing and unhappening. It uses self-effacing gestures such as the sweeping of sand, and audience participation in enunciating found-words from texts and slogans, to trace cultural revolutions and social demonstrations from May ’68 to Occupy––and asks whether such events insist or desist in happening today. \n \nThis collection contains a 300-word Statement outlining the research project; a Research Timeline and set of Research Questions; photographic documentation of the Bath 2017 iteration of the artwork and information relating to the Embodied Cartographies Symposium; photographic documentation and video footage of the Montreal 2018 iteration of the artwork and documentation relating to Resting, Walking, Place-Making: How Do We Talk About Invisible, Liminal Spaces in Art?; a journal article by Luzar; and a bibliography of works cited.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.049 | 0.000 |
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