MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971126448 · doi:10.1353/vpr.2014.0014

Pioneers of Social Progress?: Gender and Technology in British Printing Trade Union Journals, 1840–65

2014· article· en· W1971126448 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueVictorian periodicals review · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCybernetics and Technology in Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersResearch Society for Victorian Periodicals
KeywordsCraftRealmWorkforceTrade unionApprenticeshipPolitical scienceGender studiesSociologyEconomic historyHistoryArtLawLabour economicsEconomicsVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay examines mid-nineteenth century compositors’ and bookbinders’ trade union journals and their presentation of gendered workplaces: the male world of the skilled compositor and the female realm of book-folders and stitchers. Compositors were among the best educated of London artisans who were anxious to safeguard their traditions against the combined threat of apprentices, women compositors, and mechanization. By emphasizing the masculine traditions of the craft, opposing technology, and arguing for women’s relegation to the domestic sphere, compositors’ journals constructed a socially conservative community that stood in stark contrast to the bookbinders’ union, which campaigned on behalf of a female workforce.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.520

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.238 · 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