MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220660986 · doi:10.18432/ari29627

Inclinations

2022· article· en· W4220660986 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Danielle Peers, Alice Sheppard, Lindsay Eales, Abbie Schenk

Bibliographic record

VenueArt/Research International A Transdisciplinary Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Rights and Representation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDanceNarrativeSociologyDisability studiesGenerativityDisabled peopleReferentPower (physics)GazeEconomic JusticeAbleismAestheticsWork (physics)PsychologyGender studiesSocial psychologyVisual artsPolitical scienceArtLinguisticsPsychoanalysisLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inclinations is an audio-described, 7-minute, site-specific, disability dance on film followed by a video discussion between three of the disabled artist-researchers. Throughout this project, we embraced a research-creation methodology to engage with the research question: How can we fully embed intersectional disability justice, not only as a theoretical lens, but also, as a methodological imperative? This work centres the concepts of disability culture and disability generativity, and purposefully diverges from more popular traditions of physically-integrated dance in favour of disability dance. We demonstrate and discuss how this choice—alongside various filmic practices—seeks to decentre the ableist gaze, normalizing narratives, and the ubiquitous non-disabled referent. Other methodological considerations enacted and discussed in this work include centring access aesthetics, consent, care, disability justice principles, and questions of power in every aspect of the creation process.

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 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)0.006
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.721
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.000

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 head0.169
GPT teacher head0.520
Teacher spread0.351 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArt/Research International A Transdisciplinary JournalSame topicDisability Rights and RepresentationFrench-language works237,207