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
The need to attend to the spiritual and religious dimensions of a person’s worldview and frame of reference is an axiom of spiritually-sensitive practice, but practice models and processes for facilitating this kind of integrative understanding are few. This paper addresses this gap. Reported are findings from an interpretive study that utilized a novel method of in-depth reflective inquiry to access and analyze the experienced knowledge of frontline practitioners regarding ways of understanding the meanings, and the source of meanings, that people use to interpret their experiential reality. What emerged in the analysis was not a toolbox of assessment techniques, but rather an integrative model for spiritually and culturally sensitive practice – a model grounded in interwoven capacities to navigate complexity, to inquire reflexively, to think critically, and to engage interpretively in an inductive, improvisational and dialogical process of co-creating space for shared understanding of meanings that people use to interpret the world and their place in it.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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