MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391879002 · doi:10.4324/9781003310709-19

The Four Stories

2024· book-chapter· en· W4391879002 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Fiona J. Moola, Madalyn Murray, Dyan Roy, Ron Buliung

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Rights and Representation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this representational chapter, we aim to achieve several objectives. First, we name the ways in which children have been excluded from both critical disability and postcolonial studies. This denial and omission have had grave implications and perpetuated silence around disabled racialised childhoods. Second, we deconstruct and unpack the ways in which the ongoing colonial project has served to oppress and marginalise disabled Indigenous families while, at the same time, creating contexts and conditions that are disability-producing. Third, we unpack the ways in which disability meanings among Indigenous people may differ significantly from Euro-centric understandings of health, disease, disability and illness. Fourth, we outline the contributions that stories and the disability justice approach may have for opening up new research spaces that are attentive to the dire need to de-centre whiteness from the systems, practices and policies of everyday life. Finally, we discuss what decolonised health care spaces for Indigenous disabled children and families might look like. Our writing collective includes a racialised first-generation Canadian of South African ancestry (Fiona), two Indigenous Anishinaabe-Kew women from Wilwemikong (Dyan) and Nipissing First Nation (Madalyn), as well as a Canadian white ally scholar who is a parent to a disabled child (Ronald).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.506
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDisability Rights and RepresentationFrench-language works237,207