Emerging Horizons, Part Two. Harmony’s Story: Answering the Big Question
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This second installment of the Emerging Horizons series explores Harmony’s digital storytelling (DST) experience (please see the introductory editorial to the series, Crafting Meaning, Cultivating Understanding, to access the film). In this article I lean on the philosophy of Paul Ricœur to suggest that 1) the metaphorical possibilities of DST could enable Adolescent and Young Adult (AYA) cancer survivors to come to a deeper understanding of their own cancer experiences and 2) the process of “emplotment” in the creation of a digital story has the power to transform the random and coincidental, pre-narrative experience of cancer into a meaningful whole. I conclude by discussing how attaching meaning to, and learning from, an otherwise meaningless cancer experience through the DST process, can help AYA cancer survivors construct their own answer to the “big question” of cancer in young adulthood.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it