Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dynamic Presencing offers a significant advancement in the work of presencing. The work as a whole opens up new territory at the bottom of the U that develops existing understandings and applications of presencing in Theory U contexts. Key to the first three journeys is the ability to embody different level-depths of presence and to learn to rest in stillness and discern emergence in a way that generates a subtle but active renewal of our seeing from Source. We suggest the Yoga Sutras, as a foundational document of the philosophy and practice of yoga, and as a holistic and systemic approach to stilling the waves of consciousness, offer supportive practices and ways of being that are complimentary to the Dynamic Presencing method of attuning to, being and seeing from Source. In this article, we illustrate how yoga practice not only aligns with but also provides an important and necessary contribution to the Dynamic Presencing mastery ideal of engaging presencing as a generative way of being. To this end, we outline two of the eight limbs or components of classical yoga—yama-niyama and gunas—as a means of demonstrating these alignments and essential contributions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".