MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402115118 · doi:10.20897/femenc/14947

Sarah Leavitt’s <i>Tangles</i>: Teaching Queer Caregiving Memoir on Disability, and Pedagogy as Resistance

2024· article· en· W4402115118 on OpenAlex
Jane Tolmie

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueFeminist Encounters A Journal of Critical Studies in Culture and Politics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicComics and Graphic Narratives
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQueerMemoirResistance (ecology)PsychologyArtTheologySociologyPsychoanalysisPedagogyPhilosophyLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines Sarah Leavitt’s graphic novel <i>Tangles: A story about Alzheimer’s, my mother and me</i> (2010, 2011 UK), in relation to queer identity, feminist wilfulness (Ahmed, 2014), and critical disability studies. <i>Tangles</i> takes up themes of lesbianism, disability, and activism, and it does so through storytelling. Studies around life writing and disability, including the dementia disease Alzheimer’s, point the reader strongly toward recognition of the key importance of storytelling in the preservation of selfhood. Whose stories are told, and whose are not, and by whom? How can or does patient selfhood emerge or survive in caregiving narratives written and/or drawn by others? This article examines graphic memoir in the contexts of Comics Studies, Canadian Gender Studies and Critical Disability Studies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.799
Threshold uncertainty score0.894

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.320 · 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