Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is a visual and textual inquiry into the aesthetics of female scholarship as re/presented and lived through the clothed, disciplined/transgressing bodies of female scholars.In the tradition of arts-informed research (Cole and Knowles, 2007), through image and text situated meanings of scholarship and visual identity are analyzed, poetized, re/created and re/presented.Transcripts based on conversations with Rebecca, Kris, Paula and Lisette and photographs of them inspire poems, collages, drawings and paintings, embracing the idea that visual and poetic ways of knowing are discrete, connected, unique and taken for granted ways of understanding and performing scholarship, of being in and knowing the world.Situated in the theoretical arenas of arts informed research and social theory on the body and clothing, the poetry, drawings and paintings confirm Kaiser, Chandler and Hammidi (2001) and Green's (2001) assertions that female scholars strategize through dress in order to assert a scholarly identity and authority.Clothes are negotiated expressions of self and visual identity with the body as mediator (Braziel and LeBesco, 2001;Butler, 1993; Davis, 1997; Holliday and Hassard 2001;Shilling, 1993); clothing choices (in university settings) are gendered (Butler, 1999; Kirkham, 1996; Sanders, 1996).The poems and images speak of survival, pain, growth and stagnation; they make visible aspects of how identity and scholarship is embodied, lived and re/presented; they provide opportunities to reflect on arts-informed research, the aesthetics of the clothed body, the body and social theory, and the semiotics of clothing.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.003 |
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".