Understanding Disabled Being in Terms of Corporeal Variability, Access, and Meaning
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
Many people conceive of disabled Being as a disadvantageous and undesirable way of existing but these characteristics are neither inherent nor immutable. Martin Heidegger’s hermeneutic phenomenology framework, with emphases on his notions of care and meaning formulation and revelation, guided the current exploration of disabled Being. In addition, the author consulted critical and crip phenomenology along with data gleaned from the lives of disabled people. The results of the exploration illuminated how interactions between bodies and entities impact access. In turn, access, defined as the ability to use entities in their intended manner, affects revealed meanings. Atypical bodies and entities generally do not mesh well which hinders access and leads to revealing negatively oriented and devalued meanings. In contrast, using entities in the intended manner to complete personally relevant activities and projects contributes to positively oriented meanings. The article concludes by outlining two concomitant actions that foster more favorable views of disabled Being. First, creating inclusive practices of care and second, promoting thoughtful, collaborative discourse that seeks valued meanings of and roles for impairments in people’s lives.
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.
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Theoretical or conceptual | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Other About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Theoretical or conceptual | high |
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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