Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bringing an interdisciplinary edited collection together involves many people and a great wealth of generally unseen work.During the creative process of editing this book, our relationships as a team of editors deepened and evolved, and we finish with many more collaborations on the horizon.Much of the intellectual and emotional labour that went into the book happened amid a number of intersecting activities, projects, and relationships.The idea for it began to percolate in a conversation among the editors following the 2015 International Association of Geriatrics and Gerontology Euro pean Region Congress in Dublin.The conference theme of "Unlocking the Demo graphic Dividend" had elicited a number of works exploring aging, intersectionality, culture, and art.Exciting questions related to aging and race, ethnicity, gender, and sexuality were taken up, while disability was margin alized, medicalized, or altogether absent.At the same time, the Ontariobased Bodies in Translation: Activist Art, Technology and Access to Life (BIT) partnership project proposal was being developed.Co-led by Carla Rice and Eliza Chandler, BIT sets in motion a creative and intellectual wave of leading-edge artistic creation research, technological innovation, and critical inquiry within and beyond Ontario.Blending theories and practices of disability arts, feminist arts, and community arts, this project explores how, and to what ends, we can cultivate arts that refigure bodies/minds of difference.In BIT, aging is recognized as a creative expression, lived reality, social location, political identity, and embodied
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 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.302 | 0.214 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".