MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2884443009 · doi:10.22215/etd/2015-10915

Framing Narratives: An Examination of Women's Histories in the Wyatt Historic House Museum

2015· dissertation· en· W2884443009 on OpenAlexaff
Leanne Gaudet

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchitecture, Design, and Social History
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityWind Energy Institute of CanadaQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeFraming (construction)ArchitectureHistoryInterpretation (philosophy)Context (archaeology)Visual artsAestheticsGenealogyArtLiteratureArchaeologyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Historic house museums can offer unique access to a variety of histories and narratives.However, there is a tendency for homes to be reconstructed, conserved, and curated as historic house museums in an attempt to preserve male-centred histories.This male focus within a domestic context is ironic, as the home was a place strongly associated with constructed ideals of women during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.Adopting a material culture perspective, this thesis explores the potential of house museums to provide rich and textured histories through the curation and interpretation of historical objects, including the architecture of the house itself.My thesis examines the Wyatt Historic House Museum as a site that successfully frames women's histories and narratives.I discuss a series of objects and architectural elements of the home and consider in particular how they contribute to a narrative framing of women's health issues during the period.i When first entering the Wyatt Historic House Museum, located in Summerside, Prince Edward Island, visitors are greeted by two framed oil on canvas portraits of women seated in domestic interiors.Hung directly across from one another in the front entrance hall, the portraits depict the two daughters of Summerside's prominent Wyatt family: Wanda Wyatt [Figure Intro.1] and Dorothy Wyatt [Figure Intro.2].Miss Marion Jack, a friend of the girls, painted the portraits while the three were in Chicago together in the late 1910s.Adhering to conventions of the turn 3

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.120
Threshold uncertainty score0.239

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0290.019
Scholarly communication0.0120.008
Open science0.0020.011
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.219 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArchitecture, Design, and Social HistoryFrench-language works237,207