Bibliographic record
Abstract
Images of allegorical women have often appeared on maps or in atlas frontispieces as objects in need of security provided by male protectors or as the counterpoint, objects to be dominated by male possessors. Exploring the role of women in the early modern map trade initially reveals not only a similar male dominance but also similar calls for protection. Nearly 10 years ago, Alice Hudson and Mary McMichael Ritzlin produced a checklist of about 300 pre-twentieth-century women in cartography. The present work contributes to the further investigation of some of these women in the early modern map trade and studies in the allied field of book printing, and more general works on women in commercial trade provide the framework for this piece. Women in the map trade were quite cognizant of the challenges of their gender and used a feminine discourse – that is, they played the feminine card – when it served their interests. All of these women, however, participated in the male discourse of the corporate community, which entailed not only making contracts and partnerships and advertising and producing new works but also making use of the social network within the trade, as well as exploiting the patronage connections cultivated by their husbands before them.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".