MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Stand With Us

2025· book-chapter· en· W4411604542 on OpenAlexaff
Nasim Niknafs

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2025
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicQualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract On September 16, 2022, a young Kurdish Iranian woman, Jina Amini, or as she is internationally known, Mahsa Amini, died in hospital under police custody. Her death angered many Iranians but especially the Kurdish community who have been historically ostracized in the country pre- and post-1979 revolution. Jina’s death became the beginning of a robust feminist movement in the country called “Woman, Life, Freedom.” What this feminist movement represents, however, is not a domestic fight against a totalitarian regime but a universal struggle against intersectional oppression. Within this climate, many Iranian women music educators seek musical and educational opportunities outside of the borders, as they have been suffering from the absence of stable educational and musical freedom in the country. Higher music education institutions are some of the spaces from which these women music educators request assistance. In this chapter, I put forth two intermingling thoughts. First, I suggest regardless of the magnitude of the work, solidarity work in higher music institutions is not a choice, but a responsibility. Second, through the “Woman, Life, Freedom” movement in Iran, I propose that no solidarity work can happen without a feminist lens and even more so without being an affective organization of multiple forces. Solidarity work is necessarily a public and affective act. Specifically, within higher music education institutions one must consider this work as a collective and public endeavor.

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 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)0.000
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.764

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooksSame topicQualitative Research Methods and EthicsFrench-language works237,207