Diffusion de la recherche féministe dans les Amériques. Émergence, construction et consolidation d’un champ disciplinaire : Le concept de genre dans la revue Feminist Studies (1972-2013)
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The journals disseminating Feminist Research are communication channels needed for sharing, questioning, confrontation and consolidation of knowledge on women and on social gender relations, of theoretical underpinnings and of the political scope. Since the publication of the first issues of Feminist Studies (1972), of Women’s Studies : An Interdisciplinary Journal (1972) and among others of the still current journal Signs (1975), the Association of College & Research Librairies listed, for 2008, about forty journals in the Women and Gender Studies section; these journals contributed to the continuity and transformations of Feminist Studies in the Americas. The issues addressed, the authors’ background, for more than 40 years, contributed to establishing the credibility of feminist issues on scientific bases. These publications are obviously in English and are excluded from this list South American and Mexican journals, including the excellent Brazilian journal Revista Estudos Feminista (1992), publishing in Spanish and in Portuguese, and the Quebec and Francophone journal Recherches féministes (1987), that have to be added to reflect the diversity of themes and approaches and provide an overview of the evolution of the field in the Americas.
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 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 | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it