MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417273292 · doi:10.58544/imsj.v3i1.8203

Lyrical Ableism and the Disabled Poem

2025· article· W4417273292 on OpenAlexaff
Rob Macaisa Colgate

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Mad Studies Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPoetry Analysis and Criticism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbleismPoetryNormativeLife writingProcess (computing)Accommodation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In referring to texts as “bodies,” we understand the poem as a living body with the capacity to be mad or disabled. Drawing on Kim’s notion of curative violence, this article explores the academic creative writing workshop as an institutional force of so-called lyrical ableism, creating normative standards of creative practice that are intolerant to inherently harmless differences in form and style. The article suggests that care networks might be formed not only between fellow poets, but between poets and their own poems. Suggestions are given for maddening the writing workshop in the vein of Chandler’s “cripping the arts,” outlining a process that identifies (alleged) flaws in early drafts as components of the poem’s madness before using an access-first framework to guide revision as an act of accommodation rather than violent elimination.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.312 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 venueInternational Mad Studies JournalSame topicPoetry Analysis and CriticismFrench-language works237,207