MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967051667 · doi:10.1080/10894160.2015.969594

Lesbians in the City: Mobilities and Relational Geographies

2015· article· en· W1967051667 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Catherine J. Nash, Andrew Gorman‐Murray

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Lesbian Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Planning and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMobilitiesQueerScholarshipGender studiesSociologyArgument (complex analysis)AnthropologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines contemporary lesbians' (and queer women's) urban geographies, drawing from empirical research on Toronto, Canada and Sydney, Australia. Our argument is grounded in research highlighting lesbians' distinctive urban experiences: lesbians have both participated in gay villages and gay male spaces and, importantly, carved out their own urban places, including commercial and residential concentrations. In this article we use new mobilities scholarship to delineate historical and contemporary relational geographies materializing since World War II, which continue to rewrite lesbians' and queer women's inhabitation and experiences of urban landscapes in Toronto and Sydney.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.371
Threshold uncertainty score0.191

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.216
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.160 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations32
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Lesbian StudiesSame topicUrban Planning and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207