MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7030305898

Mobilizing Metaphor : Art, Culture, and Disability Activism in Canada

2016· book· en· W7030305898 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueE-Artexte (Artexte) · 2016
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Rights and Representation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOppressionDisability studiesMetaphorMedical model of disabilityPoliticsVariety (cybernetics)AusterityCognitive reframing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

"Mobilizing Metaphor illustrates how artistic and radical efforts are reshaping disability activism in Canada and, in the process, challenging dominant perceptions of disability.
\n
\nRecent changes to Canadian disability policy have seen disability programs hampered by funding cuts and other austerity measures. But this oppression has also given new life to an already vibrant Canadian tradition of disability activism. Until now, research has focused on the legal and policy spheres and overlooked disability activism that expresses itself alongside and outside conventional policy reform, often through a variety of art forms.
\n
\nHere, contributions by disability artists, activists, and academics show how disability art is distinctive as both art and social action. Richly illustrated with photographs and other images, and including an insightful concluding chapter by renowned disability scholar Tanya Titchkoksy, this array of artistic, cultural, and radical approaches to disability politics demonstrates that disability activism is as varied as the populations it represents. As the contributors sketch the shifting contours of disability politics in Canada and show how disability oppression is not isolated from other prejudices, they challenge us to re-examine how we enact social and political change." -- Publisher's website.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.414
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueE-Artexte (Artexte)Same topicDisability Rights and RepresentationFrench-language works237,207