Bibliographic record
Abstract
An Anthropological Lens on End-of-Life: Transitions and Liminalities."The seven contributions gathered here examine death as a liminal space, each from a distinct vantage point.Sylvie Fortin traces the temporal and social trajectory of this in-between space, while Alyson Stone considers the ambiguous status of symptom-relieving cancer treatments as patients approach inevitable death.Louise Chartrand highlights how the decisions of caregivers and relatives shape the trajectory of care, and Sabrina Lessard examines how the death of a very old person becomes legitimate depending on different factors including social status.Ellen Badone engages with debates surrounding Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) for people with mental health issues, and Rachel Cummings reflects on the final moments of life while interrogating hospital ethnography and the "liminal" position of the researcher in clinical settings.Finally, Géraldine Mossière illuminates the material and creative dimensions of contemporary secular funeral rites, particularly those surrounding cremation.Together, these contributions reveal the end of life as a profoundly liminal realm, rich in uncertainty, hope, and pain, and expressed in all their nuanced forms.
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 | 0.004 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.038 | 0.029 |
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".