At once liberating and exclusionary? A Lefebvrean analysis of Gilda’s Club of Toronto
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
This study uses a Lefebvrean analysis to explore the ways social relations are negotiated and contested in the production of a quasi-recreational space called Gilda’s Club of Greater Toronto, a venue that provides complementary care and support to people living with cancer. It does so by asking how Gilda’s Club, as a social space, resists and/or reproduces the conflicts and challenges of care for people living with cancer. Drawing on the work of Henri Lefebvre to guide the analysis, qualitative data collected from 26 club members were used to examine the production of the club as a conceived, perceived and lived space. The findings underscore the insurgent and transformative possibilities of a social space like Gilda’s Club for people living with cancer, while also exposing the club as a site of discriminatory practices wherein marginalisation was produced and enforced. The complex tension between these contrasting practices is explored.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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