Relational Praxis Art: Confronting Epistemic Injustice In Lumpen Community
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a gentrifying Toronto neighbourhood, unwaged/unhoused community members work to maintain their access to a small park that is the heart of their cultural, economic and spiritual practices. Besieged by institutional violence and medicalization, the violences of colonial-capitalism, ageism, ableism, stigmatization and ongoing trauma, their inhabitation of the park is seen to make it “sketchy.” The Friends of Watkinson Park (FoWP) was formed to resist exclusion by gentrification. In working with FoWP I have generated a method called relational praxis art (rpa). With rpa, I engage local materially-based exchange relations and social reproduction practices that build low-income community as a basis for resisting symbolic violence and epistemic injustice: blaming and shaming low-income peoples for the conditions of their lives and the denial of their truths and knowledge contributions. Rpa prioritizes political agency, knowledge production, culture and creativity to generate interventions that assert low-income inhabitation of urban space towards a liberatory future.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".