Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper contributes to developing understandings of strong commitments to particular forms of work and how they are sustained against bleak, unstable, exploitative and self-exploitative conditions. It approaches this duality between feeling and structure within the temporal and relational qualities of hope as they are experienced by women jewellery designer-makers in Birmingham Jewellery Quarter. The paper locates these hopes in the Craftswoman's Imperative, a symbolic good and material practice that is concerned with upholding objective values of the truth and beauty of artisanship. The paper details how the hopes of these designer-makers become aligned with those of policy-actors for a reinvigoration of British craftsmanship. It then explores how hope is upheld, and challenged, through sensory experiences of engaging with the material world. Finally, the paper explores these designer-makers’ optimistic practices for achieving the value of the Craftswoman's Imperative.
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 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.035 | 0.012 |
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".