Raising Children: Philosophical Hermeneutics and Children with Life-Limiting Illness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children are authentically hermeneutic beings; they are not only open to the possibility that the other may be right, but often expect that the perspective of the other is correct. The hermeneutic tenets of history, tradition, and authority shape how children and childrearing are perceived in society. Children are often regarded as in-progress, and this has implications for children diagnosed with life-limiting illness and the pediatric palliative healthcare providers that care for them. Children who experience unique phenomena, such as dying in childhood, may possess an authority gained through superior insight that adults often overlook. Art is a common language that can be used in hermeneutic research to better understand children’s experiences of life-limiting illness. Researchers who work with children must raise the value of children’s perspectives, find a shared language to foster understanding, and enter the circle with the same genuine hermeneutic spirit that children exemplify.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.025 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.070 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".