MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2576754001 · doi:10.1080/00918369.2017.1280987

Democratizing LGBTQ History Online: Digitizing Public History in “U.S. Homophile Internationalism”

2017· article· en· W2576754001 on OpenAlexafffund
Tamara de Szegheo Lang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Homosexuality · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDigital and Traditional Archives Management
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityWomen's and Gender Studies et Recherches Féministes
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsInternationalism (politics)DigitizationPublic historyDigital collectionsMedia studiesSociologyPolitical scienceWorld Wide WebPoliticsComputer scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article argues that the online archive and exhibit "U.S. Homophile Internationalism" effectively contributes to the democratizing effects that digital archives and online initiatives are having on the practice of history. "U.S. Homophile Internationalism" is an online archive of over 800 digitized articles, letters, advertisements, and other materials from the U.S. homophile press that reference six non-U.S. regions of the world. It also provides visitors with introductory regional essays, annotated bibliographies, and an interactive map feature. This essay weaves "U.S. Homophile Internationalism" into the debates in community-run LGBTQ archives regarding the digitization of archival materials and the possibilities presented by digital public history. In doing so, it outlines the structure and content of "U.S. Homophile Internationalism," highlighting how it increases the public accessibility of primary sources, encourages historical research on regions of the world that have not been adequately represented in LGBTQ history writing, and creates interactive components to support public engagements with the Web site.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.829
Threshold uncertainty score0.757

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.153
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.118 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HomosexualitySame topicDigital and Traditional Archives ManagementFrench-language works237,207