Leaning into life with somatic sensitivity: Lessons learned from world-class experts of partnered practices
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
Partnered practices reveal somatic insights into leaning-in and prompt us to consider how we can move responsively and interactively with others. Particular experiences of relational leaning are described through a motion-sensing phenomenological approach framed by the authors’ Interactive Function2Flow model of somatic education. With sensitivity to movement function, form, feeling and flow, this relational leaning is explored through the slow and controlled balances of acroyoga, the gentle forward and backwards lunges of push hands tai chi, the fast paced, rhythmical walking of salsa dance, and the effervescent gait transitions of equestrian arts. We consider the act of leaning-in and the relational awareness of each partnered practice in terms of the life lessons of connecting with a partner, responding to conflict with composure, giving less or more of oneself in a given situation and, in so doing, moving with enhanced motion-sensitivity into a state of interactive flow.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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