MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367023756 · doi:10.3138/jh-57-3-2022-0018

Sexual Citizenship and the Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras

2022· article· en· W4367023756 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Michelle Arrow, Leigh Boucher

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of History · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAsian American and Pacific Histories
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParadeQueerLesbianCitizenshipPrideGender studiesStorytellingSociologyForegroundingHeteronormativityNarrativeMedia studiesPolitical scienceLawArtPoliticsLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since its beginnings as a parade and protest in 1978, the annual Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras has become something of a national juggernaut of queer pride in Australia, as well as an international tourist destination. At the centre of this event is an annual parade through the queer heartland of Sydney, comprised of floats and marching groups of performers. This article will investigate the changing stories told about the Australian nation at this march and its associated commemorative events. Tracing the history of the parade and associated storytelling offers a unique chance to trace the contradictory claims to and contestations over sexual citizenship over 40 years. While recent storytelling at the Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras has often been tied to a pleasing liberal narrative of incremental reform and the recognition of sexual rights within the nation-state, the Mardi Gas parade has actually been a site of continual contestation over the terms of national inclusion and the limits of sexual citizenship. How, then, have the Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras queered the sexual and racial dimensions of citizenship in Australia, and what are some of the different historical forces and transformations that have inflected and reshaped these moments?

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.013
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.230 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HistorySame topicAsian American and Pacific HistoriesFrench-language works237,207