Emerging new practices in technology to support independent community access for people with intellectual and cognitive disabilities
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
The concept of community access is a multidimensional term, which may involve issues related to physical access, knowledge and information, power and control, relationships and communications, advocacy, participation and quality of life [21]. This paper discusses historical and emerging practices and interventions related to physical access to community and community based information for individuals with cognitive disabilities such as intellectual disability, autism or traumatic brain injury. While much societal attention has been paid to features of independent community access for populations such as individuals with hearing, vision or physical disabilities, less attention has focused on independent community access for people with intellectual and other significant cognitive disabilities. Attitudes and actions by families and professional service communities are often mixed for some individuals in this population. The somewhat limited research base in these areas is explored, including a case study review and results from several promising feasibility studies. The paper concludes with comments concerning future prospects and recommendations for improving independent community access for persons with significant cognitive disabilities.
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 | 0.001 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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