BOOK REVIEW: Annmarie Adams.<b>ARCHITECTURE IN THE FAMILY WAY: DOCTORS, HOUSES, AND WOMEN, 1870-1900</b>. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1996.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
That the history of Victorian feminism embraces a number of insoluble paradoxes probably will not surprise the readers of Annmarie Adams's Architecture in the Family Way; but they will certainly be delighted at the author's deft handling of the complexities of women's relationships to the medical and architectural professions during the last part of the nineteenth century. Toward the end of her study, Adams reiterates a theme that has been implicit throughout her investigation of the Victorian woman's "shifting relationship to the built environment" (3): "The turn of the century [. . .] marked the end rather than the beginning of a period when women enjoyed considerable control over the domestic spaces they inhabited" (162). Despite having effectively used their influence over interior decoration and the new field of domestic sanitation to promote feminist causes, "women returned to motherhood" (162) while architects and doctors regained control over domestic spaces and women's bodies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.070 | 0.050 |
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".