Bibliographic record
Abstract
When illness and disability strike, it can seem as though one’s very being is threatened. We tend to consider illness a temporary situation, a phase, a phase that will be done with, sooner or later, and the victim of the attack will be rectified, and will survive it. But in chronic illness, there is a gap, a missing piece that cannot be found, despite all attempts. This is not necessarily a loss, as to claim that there is a loss falls into dangerous territory of positing a once complete or whole body and/or self. The losses are not due to a changing body, but rather discriminatory disablement by society’s understandings of disability. When bodies begin to falter, painful experiences of embodiment and how we experience the world begin to emerge. But to survive is to live through, live with, or live without something. To survive is to also be resilient to any losses. To be a survivor is to have been on the threshold of non-surviving, to have considered giving up, letting go – to allow for a break, a rupture from resilience.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.047 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".