Relate North:Practising Place, Heritage, Art & Design for Creative Communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
n a publication with the broad subtitle of Practising Place, Heritage, Art & Design for Creative Communities, one would expect to find chapters and visual essays covering a wide range of topics.We do not think readers will be disappointed as the contents of this book address issues ranging from the special conditions facing designers in the North and Arctic to the potential of art and science working together to raise awareness of plastic pollution in the sea and shorelines.As in the previous Relate North anthologies (Jokela & Coutts, 2014, 2015, 2016; Relate North 2017), authors are based in northern and Arctic countries including Canada, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia and Scotland.The book explores contemporary practices in arts-based research and knowledge exchange in the fields of arts and design.Authors provide thought-provoking accounts of current practice in these countries.By focusing on Northern and Arctic perspectives in contemporary art, design and education, the studies investigate issues of heritage, sustainability, socially engaged arts practice and socio-culturally sensitive research.The call for this volume was issued at the fifth Relate North symposium and exhibition of the University of the Arctic, Arctic Sustainable Arts and Design Thematic Network (ASAD), which was held in November 2016 at Shetland College, University of the Highlands and Islands (UHI) in Lerwick, Scotland.The content of this volume was selected from the proposals submitted, including many from authors who were
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".