Bibliographic record
Abstract
Within the last decade, emerging research and activism in the sphere of transgender and gender non-binary (TGNB) persons has necessitated new vocabulary and perspectives. Families of TGNB are often challenged to reevaluate understandings of gender, of sexuality, and the family unit itself. Gender binaries are perpetuated and reinforced in Western culture through our gender “performances” (Butler, 2004), and children are judged on their performances (Wahlig, 2015). The conceptual model of decentering cisnormativity allows researchers to analyze when tensions grow taut when society members are confronted with gender nonconformity. Parents often undergo transformation when they choose to explore these tensions, deconstruct their assumptions about gender, and critically reflect on their underlying biases, belief systems, values, and understandings. In this way, it is not only TGNB children who transition, but those around them (Malpas, 2017) as their belief systems and social constructions of gender are called into question.
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 | 0.015 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.031 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".