MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2854207421 · doi:10.24908/iqurcp.11612

Relative Movement: Investigating the Entanglement of Women's Physical and Political Emancipation

2018· article· en· W2854207421 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Allison Gallagher, Xiaoyue Gao, Kaitlyn MacDonald, Gregory Radisic, Elaine J. Yuan

Bibliographic record

VenueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference Proceedings · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEconomic and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuffrageEmancipationPoliticsPolitical scienceParliamentGender studiesFeminismLawSociologyMedia studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This joint research project stems from our seminar "Contemporary Germany through Media and News". 2018 marks 100 years since women gained the right to vote in Germany and Austria and 47 years post-suffrage in Switzerland. To celebrate and assess this milestone, our course is focusing on women's suffrage now and then.
 What does universal suffrage mean now, in a Germany with a female Chancellor and a Parliament containing a right-wing party; in a Europe that is regionalizing; in a world in which governments are in deficit while the richest avoid taxation and finance their chosen interests?
 What did the vote mean then, during the heat of the struggles; when activists risked lives for more self-determination; when societies were organized around working-class women's double burdens and bourgeois women's matrimonial hearths?
 Our materials of study include the following: two feature films that frame the period, Asta Nielsen's die Suffragette (1913), a perhaps ironic love story about the voting struggle in Germany, and Petra Volpe's die göttliche Ordnung (2017), a tale of a small Swiss town's decision for universal suffrage. These films are augmented by contemporary essays by women active in today's public landscape in Europe and texts that thematize women and movement.
 We are each writing on aspects of women's physical and political mobility and aim to publish in the Anthology on Social Justice and Intersectional Feminism. By presenting at Inquiry@Queen's we hope both to share results and improve our work ahead of submission to this peer-reviewed e-journal in early April 2018.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.013
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.124
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference ProceedingsSame topicEconomic and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207