MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7162110700 · doi:10.59236/emro.v26i7a8247

Wrought

2024· article· W7162110700 on OpenAlexaff
Lauren Stieglitz

Bibliographic record

VenueEducational Media Reviews Online · 2024
Typearticle
Language
FieldPsychology
TopicScience Education and Perceptions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativePoetryPerceptionShot (pellet)Mental image

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Distributed by Bullfrog Films, PO Box 149, Oley, PA 19547; 800-543-FROG (3764)Produced by Joel Penner and Anna SigrithurDirected by Joel Penner and Anna Sigrithur2022, Streaming, 22 mins Wrought is a visually stunning short film composed of timelapse video of organic decomposition. It explores various aspects of decomposition, breaking the film into the categories “spoil,” “ferment,” “compost” and “wrought.” In these broad categories, Wrought shows detailed imagery of food spoilage, fermentation, rotting animal corpses and growing fungi, highlighting decay by fungi bacteria and insects. Wrought is composed of close-up shots on black background, giving the viewer an unflinching view of decay. Many shots show a cross sectional view, filling the screen with the minute details of decomposition. Images are accompanied by a poetic voice over that philosophically contemplates organic decay. The film tries to challenge viewers' perception of decay by showing it in tantalizing detail, inviting the viewer to stare in grotesque fascination. The combination of intense, sometimes squeamish, imagery with florid narration makes for an interesting short film. Unfortunately, these stylistic choices hinder the film’s utility as an educational tool. The flowery narration uses vague language to talk about organic decay and does not provide enough real information about the imagery on screen to be essential viewing in a classroom setting. As Wrought is very short (22 minutes), it may be useful to show to Microbiology or Food Science courses, but those looking for a film with scientific information should look elsewhere. Wrought’s mesmerizing imagery makes it recommended for all audiences. While it is recommended for academic audiences interested in detailed visual representations of decomposition, it is lacking the scientific information needed for most classroom applications. Awards:Best New Vision Film, International Wildlife Film Festival; Emerging Filmmaker Award, Yorkton Film Festival; Avant-Garde Award, Imagine Science Film Festival; Best Overall Film & Audience Award, Fungi Film Festival; Audience Award, Vox Popular Media Arts Festival; Best Overall Film, Eating at the Edges Film Festival; Best Short Documentary, Naturvision; Best Experimental/Animation, SCINEMA International Science Film Festival; Best Short Documentary, Ecozine Film Festival

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.857
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.8570.577

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 head0.176
GPT teacher head0.499
Teacher spread0.323 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEducational Media Reviews OnlineSame topicScience Education and PerceptionsFrench-language works237,207