Intellectual Freedom and Inclusivity: Opposites or Partners?
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
A commentary on a recent controversy in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, when a speaker considered to be transphobic was allowed to book a meeting room at Vancouver Public Library. The library defended the right of the speaker to her freedom of expression, though certain conditions were placed on the event and the library publicly distanced itself from her views. The library has experienced a fractured relationship with the transgendered and gender non-confirming community since the event which it is attempting to mend. This article is an exploration of the arguments on both sides in the library community and beyond and of the larger questions about the use of public meeting rooms and freedom of expression in the 21st century. It is also about the personal journey of the author, an advocate for both intellectual freedom and LGBTQ+ rights, and her conversations to those attempting to find a new definition of what constititutes intellectual freedom.
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 | 0.001 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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