Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis explores the power dynamics inherent in discussions about legitimate knowledge and gender expectations. Through eight sessions of art and eleven interviews, it exposes oppressive systems and compares the intersections of race, class, sex, and sexuality. My interdisciplinary approach expands from the work of local contemporary artist and researcher Zandra Dahne Harding. Building upon her thesis, and including influences from feminist theorists such as Rich, hooks, and Butler, and minority activists like Tuhiwai Smith and Feinberg, I situate voices emerging from marginalized populations as equally relevant and poignant, using the case study of seventeen residents of AWAC Homeless Shelter. Art is a means of expression for those whose experiences are muted by socioeconomic disadvantage, differential access to education, and non-normative gender identities. This thesis shares an example of how oppressed people can use and personalize participation in the visual arts to subvert elements of prevailing power structures, like those related to education, criminal corrections, and gender hierarchies. Art sessions and interviews conducted with feminist and indigenous frameworks, called artivism' helped participants involved with a street-level shelter in Northern British Columbia communicate some aspects of their diverse truths of subordination. --Leaf 2.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".