Methodologies for the Creolization of Fashion Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since its inception fashion studies has occupied niche fields of enquiry that have focussed largely on Eurocentric paradigms of discussion around the engagement with fashion objects and the development and display of status and identity. Pockets of enquiry have focussed on areas outside of the Eurocentric western cannon but largely remain apart from what is considered established fashion studies. With this in mind it is clear that the structures and parameters of what can be determined as legitimate fashion study are based firmly within the considerations of Eurocentric epistemologies. This then shapes all other studies of clothing and determines whether they are allowed a place within the exclusive world of fashion studies. \n \nThis poses a challenge which the Costume Institute of the African Diaspora (CIAD) has sought, in some way, to rectify. CIAD has been developed and established to collate research and broaden academic discourse around the development of fashion studies from the perspective of people within the African Diaspora. With that aim in mind, CIAD held its first dress conference on the 4th of May, 2018 in order to bring together researchers in the field with this focus. The conference was entitled Si Wi Yah: Sartorial Representations of the African Diaspora. “Si Wi Yah” a Jamaican patois phrase which translates to “we are here” was a call for the wider fashion studies community to recognise and acknowledge the engagement with the sociology and psychology of dress taking place which doesn’t centre white western hegemonic ideology.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".