MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2746936897 · doi:10.15353/cjds.v6i3.364

That's My Story and I'm Sticking To It

2017· article· en· W2746936897 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Cindy Scott, Jen Rinaldi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Disability Studies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStorytellingContext (archaeology)The artsPoetryInstitutionSociologyVisual artsArtNarrativeMedia studiesHistoryLiteratureSocial scienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cindy Scott is a proud lesbian woman and a survivor of the Huronia Regional Centre (HRC), an institution that housed persons diagnosed with intellectual disabilities 1876-2009. She is known for her work in Orillia, Ontario speaking about institutionalization and on behalf of residents who died and were buried in the cemetery on HRC grounds. For the past four years, Cindy has been a co-researcher working with Recounting Huronia: a collective of researchers, artists, and survivors using arts-based and storytelling methods to return to and preserve lived memories of the HRC. The research team often operated in pairs, in monthly workshops that used scrapbooking, poetry, cabaret performance, and other arts-based methods to articulate traumatic memories. The stories told here came from workshop exchanges between Cindy and fellow Recounting Huronia member Jen Rinaldi, and are anchored in scrapbook entries they developed together in Recounting Huronia workshops. Cindy retold these stories for Jen to transcribe, and Jen has provided some context via footnotes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.951
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0230.011
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0040.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.004

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations22
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Disability StudiesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207