Clothes That Are Not Worn (except...): The Politics of the Clothing Collection at the Museum of Anthropology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the past quarter century, political changes in Canadian society have been reflected in a movement towards more equal relationships between museums and the people represented through their collections. This has been a time of reflection and negotiation, resulting in a very different kind of curatorial practice, one that attempts to respect and include the knowledge and wishes of the people represented. The political relationships around the clothing held in museum collections are particularly sensitive because of the close association of clothing with people. Resume Depuis vingt-cinq ans, les changements politiques survenus dans la societe canadienne se refletent dans la tendance manifeste vers des relations plus egalitaires entre les musees et les groupes de personnes representes dans leurs collections. Cette periode en a ete une de reflexion et de negociation, ce qui a entraine une pratique de conservation tres differente, qui s'efforce de respecter les gens representes et de tenir compte de leurs connaissances et de leurs desirs. Les considerations politiques relatives aux vetements figurant dans les collections des musees sont particulierement complexes en raison de l'etroite association des vetements a des personnes.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".