Bibliographic record
Abstract
“All else confusion”?: gender and social expectations Man for the field and woman for the hearth: Man for the sword and for the needle she: Man with the head and woman with the heart: Man to command and woman to obey; All else confusion. Alfred, Lord Tennyson, The Princess (1847) When Alfred, Lord Tennyson published The Princess in 1847, just as Elizabeth Gaskell was starting her writing career, it was to challenge attitudes like those expressed by the old king in these lines, and Tennyson was not alone in feeling that the doctrine known as ''separate spheres'' for men and women was ripe for change. Indeed, by 1865, the year of Gaskell's death, John Stuart Mill was able to present the first women's suffrage amendment in parliament. Nevertheless, Mill's speech, published in 1869 as The Subjection of Women , confirms that general assumptions about women's role had not changed: “[a]ll the moralities tell them that it is the duty of women, and all the current sentimentalities that it is their nature, to live for others; to make complete abnegation of themselves, and to have no life but in their affections.” One book in this tradition, published in 1839, when Gaskell was the mother of two small daughters, was Sarah Lewis's Woman's Mission . While Christian missionaries find their vocation among the heathen, Lewis argues, ''woman's mission'' is at home, exerting a beneficial influence on her menfolk. In particular, Lewis stresses the importance of mothers inculcating in their male children values of mutual respect, responsibility, and compassion before they pass beyond their mothers' influence into the public world.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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".