Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gradually queer theory, which emerged out of the particularities of academic and political situations in the USA in the 1990s, has begun to interrogate its relationship to the rest of the world. It is, of course, not surprising that analysis of (homo)sexuality from within the USA should be largely US-centric, remarkably uninterested in developments in other countries, even those as seemingly close in culture and politics as Canada and the United Kingdom. Yet there are signs of some interest in what might be termed ‘non-western’ societies, in particular the relevance of ‘queer’ to rapidly shifting notions of sexuality and gender regimes. There is now an extensive literature on the ways in which homosexuality is being shaped and changed by ‘modernisation’ and equally on how hostility to modernisation often expresses itself in the persecution of homosexuals. Very few of the discussions of ‘modern’ forms of homosexuality are posed in comparative terms; indeed, the vast majority are written without reference to similar developments in other parts of the world.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.043 | 0.002 |
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".