Bibliographic record
Abstract
Feminism Jo-Ann Wallace, Professor Emeritus / Past Editor, esc When I wrote my PhD field exams in Modernism, there were only two women writers on the list: Virginia Woolf and Gertrude Stein. I think now of Woolf, whose relationship with her father was ambivalent. On the one hand, she was clearly his intellectual heir and she had free run of his extensive library. But he also denied her the formal education that was the birthright of her brothers. In a diary entry written twenty-four years after her father’s death, Woolf speculates that, had he not died, “His life would entirely have ended mine. What would have happened? No writing; no books;—inconceivable.” I think of this when I think about what the last forty years of English Studies would have been like without the rise of second-wave feminism and its impact on the academy. Yes, women students would have had free access to the canon … but: no Djuna Barnes? no Dorothy Richardson? no Jean Rhys? no Nella Larsen? Inconceivable. [End Page 3] Jo-Ann Wallace, Professor Emeritus / Past Editor, esc English and Film Studies, University of Alberta Copyright © 2015 Association of Canadian College and University Teachers
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.044 | 0.008 |
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".