Resilient Hope: Identity, Extensibility, and Freedom as Design and Policy Considerations in Social Computing
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
This article contributes to the social computing (particularly CSCW and HCI) scholarship by conceptualizing the idea of “hope”, particularly in relation to displacement, marginalization and resistance. Based on our longitudinal and multi-phase ethnographic interventions with internally displaced populations (IDPs) in Mohakhali and Kalyanpur areas of Dhaka, Bangladesh for three consecutive years, this work demonstrates how various dynamic properties of hope, both at personal and communal level, support this group to act, react, and/or resist many layers of urban adversities in their quotidian lives. By introducing the notion “Resilient Hope” , which constitutes identity formation, radical extensibility, and freedom of departure, the paper offers a novel understanding of how such marginalized communities sustain an uncertain, yet hopeful life. Drawing from a rich body of literature in Anthropology, STS, Philosophy, and Critical Urban Studies, it argues that resilient hope for a marginal community is not a static end goal to be achieved through design but a dynamic mode of survival and operation that has the potential to inform sustainable CSCW and HCI design processes. The paper further connects its empirical findings and theoretical insights to the broader goal of social justice in computing.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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