Bibliographic record
Abstract
On November 3, 1906, at the 37th Meeting of South-West German Psychiatrists, Dr. Alois Alzheimer, reported on “a peculiar severe disease process of the cerebral cortex”. The disease with which he is associated has continued to elude a cure and is forecast to afflict one in eighty-five persons globally by 2050. Health care providers, researchers, and governments are on notice to explore different ways of understanding and addressing Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementias (ADRD) as demands for resources and funding escalate. One of those approaches, person-centered care (PCC), puts a focus on the individual, not the disease, emphasizing ability and enablement, and recognizing people with dementia as having rights of choice, personal empowerment, and self-determination. We expand on the concept of “dementia friendly communities,” embodying PCC, to envision how spaces, programs, and services within cultural heritage institutions such as galleries, libraries, archives, and museums (GLAM), could be re-thought and designed to enhance the everyday life experience of persons with ADRD. Impetus for such initiatives is provided further through the articulation, acceptance, adoption, and promotion of the rights of those with dementia as the rights of persons with disabilities. This emphasis on rights is important as it has behind it the force of international agreement and legally-binding United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2008). We argue that cultural heritage institutions have a responsibility and a rationale for servicing those who have been marginalized across time by what they have rather than who they are.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".