MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214567439 · doi:10.1080/14733285.2022.2042197

Speculative caring collaboratories: mattering research alternatives

2022· article· en· W4214567439 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueChildren s Geographies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChildren's Rights and Participation
Canadian institutionsCapilano UniversityUniversity of Victoria
FundersSocial Science Research Council
KeywordsConceptualizationCollaboratoryMaterialismSociologyEpistemologyPsychologyEngineering ethicsEngineeringComputer sciencePhilosophyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores how ‘caring collaboratories’ advance new possibilities for imagining and enlivening early childhood education and research. Thinking with María Puig de la Bellacasa’s (2017) feminist materialist theory of care the authors bring a retrospective analysis to their research experiences within three different climate change focused collaboratories. The paper begins with an overview of their research sites, anlaysis method for this paper, and common worlds orientation. This is followed by a brief introduction to Puig de la Bellacasa’s conceptualization of care and an offering of three research stories to examine what carrying her triptych of care into the collaboratory proposes to researchers and educators committed to human and more-than-human living well together. The paper concludes with speculative considerations for what such caring collaboratories might offer childhood studies with/in the conditions of our times.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.132
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.321 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it