MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7083302388 · doi:10.22329/uwdj.v1i1.8268

Constraint Poetry on Disability and Disability as Constraint

2023· article· en· W7083302388 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueUWill Discover Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPreterm Birth and Chorioamnionitis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstraint (computer-aided design)PoetryScholarshipInclusion (mineral)Constraint learningMirroringDisability studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This project elevates constraint poetry – a genre with restrictions like metre, as opposed to free verse – as a vessel for sharing disabled experiences. This area of research is especially important for advancing representations of the disabled, a stereotyped and underrepresented demographic. Sharing a constraint poem that I wrote about my multiple sclerosis (MS), the relevance of constraint poetry for disability studies manifests in the writing constraint mirroring the occasionally invisible, yet restricting, nature of MS. This poem catalyzed my research into applying constraint poetry to disability studies, forming the basis of the dissertation that I plan to write in my upcoming master’s in creative writing. Current scholarship in the field includes applying constrained writing to prisoners and the enslaved but lacks inclusion of those with disabilities. My future plans include drawing upon perspectives of disabled people and medical professionals to depict the spectrum of constraint produced by disability, as well as creating new constraints that can better express specific symptoms. This dissertation would be a collection of my constraint poetry on different disabilities and would be the first of its kind.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.024
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWill Discover JournalSame topicPreterm Birth and ChorioamnionitisFrench-language works237,207