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 article provides an introduction for social workers to ethnomethodology (EM), and suggests that they can find not only a similarity of attention between their front-line work and EM, but ways of making sense which explicate the connections between concrete and practical activity and the accomplishment of local as well as extra-local orders. EM redirects analytic attention to the ordinary and mundane ways that people in their everyday lives jointly produce, account for, and manage local, practical, and taken-for-granted scenes to produce social order. EM, by attending to what people ‘do’ in concert, rather than what they might say, think, or imagine, provides a essential empirical redirection for social work at a time when increasing attention is being given to language, discourse, and narrative. Through EM social workers can find tools to explicate the essential reflexivity of their practice and the incorrigible indexicality of professional and client accounts. By turning to EM social workers can recover and celebrate actual peoples’ artful accomplishment of local settings and forms of order.
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 | 0.017 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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