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
Based on a qualitative study of two feminist organizations located in Ontario, Canada, this article considers the tensions that state-funded organizations must negotiate in their efforts to engage in anti-oppressive (AO) practice. The rise of neoliberalism and neoconservatism in Canada has produced a political climate that threatens feminist organizations’ social justice mandates. This climate undermines feminist organizations’ efforts to advocate for their communities, to create inclusive organizations, and to provide compassionate service informed by AO principles. However, to argue that feminist service organizations are depoliticized through their relationship with state funding agencies simplifies the complexity of state-social movement relations. This article illustrates the contradictory influence state funding has on AO practice in feminist organizations and examines the ways organizations navigate challenges presented by their political climate. Despite the structural constraints facing AO practice in feminist organizations, I argue that AO frameworks can provide organizations with a renewed focus on their social justice mandates.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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