Resisting and Remaking Sex in the Petri Dish, the Clinic, and on the Track
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Assemblages of sex are continuously being enacted by policymakers, scientists, and medical providers across a range of settings, resulting in multiple and often contradictory notions of what “sex” is and how it is expressed in the body. As feminist scholars have shown, such enactments are mutable yet resilient, often with the net effect of restricting how “sex” can emerge as a material dimension of our embodied, lived experiences. What happens when feminist scholars seek to intervene in order to promote more complex, entangled, dynamic, and just enactments of “sex” in policy and practice? This lab meeting gathers interdisciplinary scholars to reflect on their experiences of pursuing change in the laboratory, the gender clinic, and on the athletics track.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.028 | 0.072 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.021 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.020 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".