MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7140150824

Building Accessible Communities

2024· book· en· W7140150824 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hawjin Falahatkar, Victoria Fast, Bushra Hashim, Fabian Neuhaus, David Nicholas

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2024
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Rights and Representation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiversity (politics)Key (lock)Meeting placeAction (physics)Common groundOrder (exchange)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The inaugural Disability & The City: Building Accessible Communities Symposium united diverse voices across the City of Calgary and served as a catalyst for collective action to build accessible communities. The symposium ignited synergetic connections between UCalgary's scholars and diverse community rightsholders integrating disability perspectives into urban development in their research, pedagogy, practice, and beyond. The program facilitated a rich exchange of ideas through interactive sessions and networking opportunities. Participants not only shared insights on key areas of need but also strategized potential future directions for disability-inclusive urban initiatives. Understanding the importance of collaborative efforts in reimagining and realizing accessible communities. this gathering marked the beginning of a unified transdisciplinary network of ongoing partnerships dedicated to transforming urban environments into thriving, inclusive spaces for people of all abilities. This magazine documents the findings, patterns, and insights from the symposium. Following up on the overwhelmingly positive feedback and as a nod to the efforts of all who joined us, you will find a collection of artifacts that capture the diversity of learned experiences, in notes, photographs, and sketches, and lived experiences, in thoughts, conversations, and processes. Beginning with an overview of the program, the magazine follows a chronological order sharing the intent, process, and outcomes of the sessions throughout the day. Key topics are thematically outlined with areas of need, challenges, and interest highlighted as areas of opportunity. Next steps, supported by actionable strategies, are finally followed by a closing note from the hosts.

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 categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.672
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.001

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 head0.152
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.299 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicDisability Rights and RepresentationFrench-language works237,207