MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2889905323 · doi:10.22215/etd/2014-10471

Propaganda? What Propaganda?: Discourse, Identity, and Queer Activism in St. Petersburg, Russia

2014· dissertation· en· W2889905323 on OpenAlexaff
Melanie Rickert

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQueerGender studiesIdentity (music)NationalismPolitical scienceSubject (documents)SociologyState (computer science)Media studiesAestheticsLawPoliticsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In light of the recent ban on the "propaganda of non-traditional sexual relations" in Russia, my thesis explores the queer activist movements in the city of St-Petersburg.In the wake of the ban, emerging and new modes of activism in St-Petersburg have developed and the individuals participating in these campaigns present different ways of being active/activists in means both public and private, street and academic, local and global.Firstly, after a brief historical overview of queer desires and identities in Russia, this thesis examines two prominent spheres of activism, academic and street-based, and their shifting practices in light of the ban.Secondly, I examine the effects of the ban on queer subject and identity making through a discussion of the various discourses (nationalist, moral, medical, global) that are present in their everyday lives.This focus demonstrates that despite the official bodies (state and church) attempting to delegitimize queer desires and subjects, queer activists are able to carve out spaces for themselves and continue in their attempts to fashion a queer world of their own.

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)0.003
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.014
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.364 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy→French-language works237,207→