MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981334431 · doi:10.15353/cjds.v3i2.161

Review of Ellis, Katie & Mike Kent, Disability and New Media

2014· article· en· W1981334431 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Catherine Duchastel de Montrouge

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Disability Studies · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Industries and Urban Development
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisability studiesScholarshipAgency (philosophy)SociologyReading (process)Media studiesNew mediaDisabled peopleGender studiesSocial mediaThe InternetSocial sciencePolitical scienceLawWorld Wide WebComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Disability and New Media should be required reading for all critical disability scholars and researchers because at the centre of Ellis and Kent’s scholarship are disabled people themselves, who are participating in cyberspaces and are contributing to online cultures. Disability studies hasn’t yet fully understood how crucial access to new media and ICT is to disabled people’s struggles for social justice, agency, and greater self-determination, but disabled Internet users have, and Ellis and Kent give them voice and body in their book.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.637
Threshold uncertainty score0.964

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.154
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Disability StudiesSame topicCultural Industries and Urban DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207