Interdisciplinarity, Transdisciplinarity, and Health Humanities: Eye Tracking, Ableism, Disability, and Art Creation
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
Abstract This chapter examines a transdisciplinary research project that develops eye tracking hardware and software for the purpose of art creation. Interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity are defined in relation to the development of the health humanities as a field that inherently draws from multiple disciplines. Transdisciplinary research is seen to transcend disciplinary boundaries and to integrate community collaboration as a mode that is geared to addressing social challenges. Eye tracking art creation relies solely on eye movements to create art on digital screens and thus has implications for individuals with limited mobility. Disability is defined in relation to ableism, which is the discriminatory practice of enforcing a corporeal norm. We discuss how technology development that has implications for individuals with disabilities, such as ours, must resist ableist tendencies to attempt to solve disability as a problem that requires a cure. Thus, we frame our research project that has as its goal the development of tools that provide the enjoyment of art creation above all.
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 | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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