MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3083733259 · doi:10.4324/9781003135463-28

Women’s Touch

2020· book-chapter· en· W3083733259 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Constance Classen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCrafts, Textile, and Design
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The expression evokes women as media of softness, comfort and refinement, the symbolic and tactile counterpart to rough and tough men. The ancient association between women and touch has been rejected, reworked and reclaimed over the centuries by women trying to formulate or conjecture a feminine identity and mode of action. In “Saarak’s Crisis” Allaq puts her tactile and tactical abilities to work ordering bodies and space. The setting for the first essay is one of the harshest environments in the world for the sense of touch: the Arctic. In “Saarak’s Crisis” anthropologist Jean Briggs begins her account of childbirth and weaning among the Utku Inuit of Canada by describing the kinesthetic sensations of travelling by sled over melting snow followed by the labor of building an igloo. A crucial component of women’s work in many cultures is, in fact, the work women perform on their own bodies in order to render them more attractive or socially acceptable.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.611
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2680.010

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.138 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCrafts, Textile, and DesignFrench-language works237,207