MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2580993545 · doi:10.22140/pv.116

Engaging Women in Public Leadership in West Virginia

2016· article· en· W2580993545 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Karen Kunz, Carrie M. Staton

Bibliographic record

VenuePublic Voices · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Politics and Representation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAppalachiaLegislatureWest virginiaState (computer science)Quarter (Canadian coin)Inclusion (mineral)Executive summaryPopulationPublic administrationState legislaturePolitical scienceSociologyGender studiesLawGeographyDemographyArchaeologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the 113th Congress begins to tackle the issues of the day, men and women alike celebrate the inclusion of a record number of women representatives. The historic numbers indicate progress, but the reality is that women compose slightly more than half of the national population but less than twenty percent of the national legislative representatives. Women fare slightly better at the state level, holding just under a quarter of state legislative seats and executive offices. In this study we explore the challenges faced and advances made by women in attaining statewide executive office in rural states by examining how they have fared in Appalachia and particularly West Virginia. We integrate theoretical understandings and statistical data with lived experiences gleaned from personal interviews conducted with the women who have held executive office in West Virginia.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.123

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0210.007
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.179
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.152 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublic VoicesSame topicGender Politics and RepresentationFrench-language works237,207