Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the 1970s, participatory action research (PAR) has grown from relative obscurity on the radical fringes of geography to become a central research paradigm adopted by researchers of all disciplinary stripes who share a common interest in improving the relevance and impact of their work in the world. Particularly adept at uncovering the root causes of social and spatial inequalities, researchers using PAR have brought research into the communities in which they work, and have simultaneously opened up elitist and exclusionary research institutions and practices to broader audiences and practitioners. PAR has come to represent a wide spectrum of political philosophies, methodologies, and dissemination practices that place emancipation, equity, and social justice front and center in the practice and objectives of research. Using numerous inspirations from critical social theory, and embracing methodological plurality and creativity, practitioners take on many forms of political oppression and social marginalization as they are encountered in the world.
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 | 0.118 | 0.113 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.020 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.034 | 0.007 |
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".