MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077435390 · doi:10.1177/1206331205274810

Citizenship in Private Space

2005· article· en· W2077435390 on OpenAlexaff
Laura Fenton

Bibliographic record

VenueSpace and Culture · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicReligion, Gender, and Enlightenment
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCitizenshipIdeal (ethics)Space (punctuation)PoliticsSociologyPrivate spaceFriendshipPublic spaceMillPolitical philosophyPublic spherePrivate sphereEpistemologyGood citizenshipLawLaw and economicsPolitical scienceSocial sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article investigates the place of space in two works of liberal social and political theory, Mary Wollstonecraft’s A Vindication of the Rights of Woman and John Stuart Mill’s The Subjection of Women. Contrary to standard interpretations of how these theorists conceptualize citizenship and its relationship to public and private space, the author contends that Wollstonecraft and Mill establish a conceptual basis for thinking about private space as a type of political community. Rather than presenting the domicile exclusively as a site where citizens cultivate the virtues that render them fit for participation in the public sphere, the author argues that these texts also introduce the possibility that one can be a citizen of private space. Moreover, she further argues that friendship emerges in these texts as the ideal form of citizenship that one can practice in domestic and intimate sites.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.042
Scholarly communication0.0100.012
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.203 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations8
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpace and CultureSame topicReligion, Gender, and EnlightenmentFrench-language works237,207