Introduction: Undoing and Unfolding Temporal Modes of Transplantation
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
Transplant medicine is frequently hailed as a pinnacle of biomedical achievement. Curative imaginaries in the field often situate transplant as a cure and a return to health, producing bifurcated temporalities of before and after transplant and proposing futures that erase disability and disabled bodies. This Special Section centers the frictions in transplant temporalities, offering examinations of how transplant troubles the binaries of life and death, self and other, and illness and health through attending to frictions of futures and cure in transplant medicine. We question how new technologies perpetuate, exacerbate, and complicate the promises of curative imaginaries in transplant medicine; interrogate tropes and technologies of transplant as destination; trace practices of inequitable access to transplantation and livable futures; foreground transplant’s looping, haunting temporalities; and introduce more-than-human lessons and the necessity of imagining collective futures. Developed with attention arts-based and experimental ways of knowing transplant through a feminist STS and critical disability studies ethos, this Special Section invites the undoing and unfolding of conventional, harmful logics of transplantation.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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