Forum: Gendered Dynamics of Academic Networks
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This forum examines whether scholars’ access to networks in the international studies profession is gendered and if so, the consequences of those networks for personal and professional success. Academic networks that encompass both professional and personal connections have been proposed as one solution to chilly climate issues because they provide a dual function of enhancing scholarly productivity and inclusion in the profession. The articles in the forum consider both professional (e.g., citation) and personal (e.g., mentorship, friendship) networks, as well as traditional (e.g., invited talks) and nontraditional (e.g., social media) networks. The authors show that biases that arise through the gendered nature of academic networks can be mitigated through social media, mentoring, and friendship networks. However, we must also be cognizant of other factors that create barriers for women in the profession (e.g., university prestige, parenthood, COVID-19).
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it