MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018576800 · doi:10.1525/phr.2010.79.4.574

Looking Back to the Road Ahead

2010· article· en· W2018576800 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePacific Historical Review · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical Gender and Feminism Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScholarshipPower (physics)MulticulturalismNarrativeHistoryPoliticsQuarter (Canadian coin)Field (mathematics)Gender studiesNarrative historySociologyPolitical scienceMedia studiesLiteratureLawArtArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The essays in this forum address the accomplishments and shortcomings of a quarter-century of western women's and gender history, suggesting future directions for the field. The authors differ in their assessments of efforts to achieve multicultural histories and to address relationships of power within western women's history, as well as about the impact of western women's history on western historical scholarship. This essay suggests that the differences in analysis, emphasis, and conclusions in the three essays that follow are only partly due to three authors' addressing different scholarly and popular discourses. Entrenched academic power relationships, conservative public politics, and the difficulty of imagining new narratives have all inhibited historians' efforts to interrogate power and disrupt relationships of domination. It is time to address these difficult and urgent tasks.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.533
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.004

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.278 · 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