MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393316041 · doi:10.1177/15327086241234705

Misfits Meet Art and Technology: Cripping Transmethodologies

2024· article· en· W4393316041 on OpenAlex
Carla Rice, Eliza Chandler, Fady Shanouda, Chelsea Temple Jones, Ingrid Mündel

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueCulture Studies &#x2194 Critical Methodologies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Rights and Representation
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityToronto Metropolitan UniversityBrock UniversityUniversity of Guelph
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPraxisNormativeSociologyProcess (computing)AestheticsPoliticsComputer scienceEpistemologyArtPolitical sciencePhilosophyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article thinks with disability theory and artistic praxis to explore how disabled artists repurpose and invent technologies in artistic processes designed to enact care and access, extend embodiment, satiate the senses, and create crip culture. Drawing on four examples, we claim that disabled artists are creative technologists whose non-normative culture-making practices approach accessibility as a transmethodological process that requires and generates new forms of interconnected technology and artfulness. Disabled artists, as “creative users,” change the uses and outcomes of technology, dis-using technologies in ways that lead to a more dynamic understanding of access and with it, of crip cultures as processual, artful, and political.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.637
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.008
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.249
GPT teacher head0.517
Teacher spread0.269 · 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