Bibliographic record
Abstract
Grace Farrell's Lillie Devereux Blake: Retracing a Life Erased (2002) explores the life and work of a once influential woman's rights activist and writer, seemingly lost to history. The biography establishes Blake's power both as an activist whose vision of woman's rights extended far beyond the objectives of the National American Woman Suffrage Association and as a writer whose fiction became increasingly direct in its depiction of the physical, psychological, and social mistreatment of women within nine-teenth-century America. Equally important and resonant in Farrell's study of Blake, however, is the thoughtful exploration of the impetuses behind and mechanisms by which Blake was ultimately silenced in her own era and relegated to obscurity in ours. Lillie Devereux Blake: Retracing a Life Erased (2002), de Grace Farrell, explore la vie et l'œuvre d'une femme qui a joué un rôle important pour les droits des femmes, mais dont l'histoire a apparemment perdu la trace. Cette biographie montre l'influence de Blake, aussi bien comme activiste dont la vision des droits des femmes allait bien au delà des objectifs de l'Association nationale pour le Vote des femmes américaines (la National American Woman Suffrage Association, ou NAWSA), que comme écrivaine dont les romans représentaient de plus en plus explicitement les mauvais traitements physiques, psychologiques et sociaux infligés aux femmes dans l'Amérique du dix-neuvième siècle. Ce qui est tout aussi important et évocateur dans l'étude que fait Farrell de Blake, cependant, c'est l'analyse sérieuse des motivations et des mécanismes qui sont entrés en jeu pour réduire Blake au silence à son époque et la reléguer à l'oubli dans la nôtre.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".