MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400839818 · doi:10.36950/2023.3ciss007

From supercrip to techno supercrip

2024· article· en· W4400839818 on OpenAlex
Gregor Wolbring

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Issues in Sport Science (CISS) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInclusion and Disability in Education and Sport
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbleismRecreationRace (biology)KinesiologyDisabled peopleNarrativePsychologySociologyGender studiesApplied psychologyPhysical therapyMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Participation in sport on all levels, physical activity, leisure and recreation is seen as important for disabled people but at the same time barriers are reported for disabled people. Sports Pedagogy, kinesiology and physical education are fields that cover physical activities. The ability of the body is at the centre of many barriers to physical activities. The supercrip and ableism are two concepts used to question the narrative around the able body. Technologies (existing, envisioned and appearing) play an increasing role in the discussions of the able body including the ability expectation of a body with beyond species-typical abilities which could lead to new barriers to participation in sport on all levels, physical activity, leisure and recreation. In 2016, the first Cybathlon which labels itself as the “Cyborg Olympics” for physically disabled athletes took place. The 2024 version has the arm prosthetic race, assistance robot race, vision assistance race, brain computer interface race, exoskeleton race, wheelchair race, leg prosthetics race and exoskeleton race. Useful concepts to discuss the techno-influence are techno-supercrip, techno-poor disabled, techno-poor impaired, enhancement (transhumanized) version of ableism, technoableism and technowashing. The aim of this study was to ascertain how academic abstracts that cover participation barriers of disabled people in sport on all levels, physical activity, leisure and recreation and the discussions of these barriers within the fields of sports pedagogy, kinesiology and physical education cover barriers in conjunction with technologies, and the concepts of supercrip, superhuman, ableism, disablism, techno-supercrip, techno-poor disabled, techno-poor impaired, enhancement, transhuman, posthuman, (transhumanized) version of ableism , cyborg, technoableism and technowashing.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.402 · 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