Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trouble has a look, of this the police must be certain. A linear narrative that suggests that what is visible is true constitutes this certainty. In conversation with Linda Alcoff, who speaks of “the realm of the visible,” this article arrives at a story of an encounter between police and policed—and enacts a pause. Guided by interpretive disability studies and Black studies, and reading for the social construction of the realm of the visible, this article narrates two stories of a moment between police officers and a Black, Deaf woman in 2021. A methodological commitment to storying reveals that, in the realm of the visible, a singular story of disability as a problem naturalizes institutions of policing and their norms of seeing as ordinary fixtures of everyday life. Police norms of seeing attempt to enact spatial domination over the lesser human and make legible the illegibility of blackness, deafness, and disability. Guided by blindness as perception, this article demonstrates how, by attending to our perceptual habits of reading deafness, blackness, and embodied difference, we develop a new habit of seeing the constitutive force of narrative.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".