Round and Round We Ran: On Circles, Reconciliation, and Relational Conscience
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
precis: Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) states that reconciliation is a process of “healing relationships that requires public truth sharing, apology, and commemoration that acknowledge and redress past harms.” Rooted in Indigenous practice, since the 1990s circles have been used as a tool in settings such as education, employment, and restorative justice. One example of this can be found in Circles of Support and Accountability (CoSA). In this essay I explain how the CoSA approach to circles can be understood as a relational retooling of the conscience, where circle members collaborate to identify oppressive values that unconsciously influence behavior and attitudes, assisting the Core Member in challenging those values toward the common good. I then discuss how this approach to circles can be applied in the TRC’s ongoing reconciliatory processes to facilitate healing.
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 | 0.000 | 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