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
taken from the last century of Canadian English-language publishing, when considered together, illustrate patterns in age-related beliefs and behaviours in Canada and in nursing-home-narrative fiction.The texts include Gothic stories of fear of the nursing home, of aging, and of death; darkly humorous stories featuring empowered residents successfully living within care homes; and fantastical stories of escape from the home and of return to youthful behaviours and preferable habitats (see Life).This article does not assess the texts included in this literary collection but instead considers what types of texts are absent from literary stories about nursing homes and what types of people are missing from the rosters of nursing homes and other care facilities and services.People such as the four old Indigenous patients depicted in Thomas King's 1993 novel Green Grass, Running Water are excluded, feel excluded, and/or exclude themselves from residency in Canadian institutions.Canada's Multiculturalism Policy was established in 1971 and (according to the current Government of Canada website) purports that "all citizens are equal" and "can keep their identities, can take pride in their ancestry and have a sense of belonging" (Government of Canada, "Canadian Multiculturalism").However, King's text suggests that the needs of marginalized groups cannot be met by institutions and services that historically have been geared toward mainstream, dominantly white, and Judeo-Christian people.Green Grass, Running Water is an important work of its time for the message it relays regarding Indigenous placement within white institutions and also for its rallying message to the Indigenous community.King's work, alongside that of other artists, has helped to draw attention from both Indigenous and
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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