Contributing to social transformation through occupation: Experiences from a think tank
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Occupational therapy is underpinned by the premise that engagement in occupation is fundamental to health and well-being. Through occupations, people are able to orchestrate their lives in ways that enable them not only to survive, but also to experience human flourishing. Through occupation, people can develop and maintain their families, neighbourhoods and communities as sources of belonging, opportunities and common action. Occupation, therefore, is not only important to each individual, but also, through collective occupation, people develop the kind of lives that they live together. Occupation is an essential factor in life quality, the experience of being human and the social transformation of individuals and of the societies of which people are a part. This article describes the formation of an International Think Tank for Occupation based social transformation. It begins with a brief overview of the conditions and context that underpinned the development of the group, and the milestones achieved to date in the establishment of a global network.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.036 | 0.057 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.022 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.026 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.020 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".