Bibliographic record
Abstract
What can caring for, and being cared for by, a garden teach us about aging well? This article is a narrative exploration of care, aging, and wellbeing in later life through conversations with an older woman and her garden in Toronto, Canada during the months of the COVID-19 pandemic. The focus is on the interconnectedness of care across generations and species. Moving away from conventional generational scripts, the article expands notions of care and aging with an intersectional, feminist and decolonial approach to relationality across time and space. The article uses interviews, photovoice-inspired sessions, and autoethnography, to look at aging and wellbeing as relational and more-than-human relationality. It extends the ethics of care beyond traditional boundaries, embracing perspectives that challenge normative assumptions of gender, age, and interspecies relations. The article aims to contribute to the current debates around colonial research logics, though a critical feminist understanding of relationality and embodied learning. It emphasizes the importance of connecting across generations, seeing land as a way to restore human and more-than-human relations while prefiguring a more care-full present.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".