Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the nineteenth century a number of aristocratic women promoted British-made textiles by wearing garments made from domestic cloth. Royalty, too, regularly endorsed this British-made cloth by wearing gowns of British manufacture frequently trimmed with English or Irish lace. Beginning in the late 1880s, however, a more organized and sophisticated relationship developed between Irish textiles and fashion and, by the 1890s, this link was both assiduously promoted and systematically marketed. The Irish Industries Association, founded by Ishbel, Countess of Aberdeen in 1886 to promote craft and alleviate poverty in Ireland, was supported by a number of British and Irish aristocrats. The Association organized exhibitions in London, established a rapport with women’s magazines, such as Lady’s Pictorial, Gentlewoman and Queen, The Lady’s Newspaper, and encouraged fashionable shops to view, buy and promote garments made from Irish wool, lace and linen. Thus Irish textiles moved from the Celtic fringe to the metropole, and from there on to the bodies of the rich and famous. It is this highly organized appeal to consumers that I shall explore here as philanthropy colluded with the market to produce fashion.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".