MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025625823 · doi:10.1177/0957926502013004455

Accountability in action: the accomplishment of gender, race and class in a meeting of the University of California Board of Regents

2002· article· en· W2025625823 on OpenAlexaff
Candace West, Sarah Fenstermaker

Bibliographic record

VenueDiscourse & Society · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Feminism, and Media
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Gender and Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRace (biology)AccountabilityClass actionAffirmative actionRelevance (law)Class (philosophy)Action (physics)SociologyGender studiesPolitical scienceLawEpistemologyState (computer science)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we analyze the proceedings of a meeting that terminated affirmative action policies at the University of California. Employin our recent theoretical reformulation of difference as an accomplishment, we explore participants' means of doing gender, race and class in these deliberations. In discussing our findings, we call attention to their relevance for `formal' and critical discourse analysis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.061
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score0.169

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.061
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0450.020
Scholarly communication0.0100.005
Open science0.0020.011
Research integrity0.0050.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations73
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiscourse & SocietySame topicGender, Feminism, and MediaFrench-language works237,207