Bibliographic record
Abstract
In October 1995, the first South African colloquium on gay and lesbian studies in southern Africa was held at the University of Cape Town.In November that same year, the annual conference of the African Studies Association (ASA), a body of mostly American and Canadian scholars and professionals, hosted the founding business meeting of the Gays and Lesbians in African Studies (GLAS) caucus.During that conference, GLAS convened the first-ever ASA-authorised round-table discussion on homosexuality in Africa, entitled 'Homosexuality in Africa and African Studies: does it exist and why does it matter?'The quest to develop a gay history and archive of and in southern Africa itself goes back to the formative 'Gay and lesbian social history workshop' organised by Mr Graeme Reid, held in 1997 at the University of the Witwatersrand.Iain Edwards was a presenting participant, providing a spoken outline of the Izingqingili zaseMkhumbane project.Edwards remembers that during the closing forward-looking session some envisioned, in Edwards' words, a 'footless past for a queer future' and Mr Zackie Achmat's presciently persuasive call for engaged historical research and archival collection covering the wider southern African region.Herein lay the origins of the Gay and Lesbian Archive (GALA).The organisation is now called Gay and Lesbian Memory in Action, whilst retaining the GALA acronym, and, as its twentieth-anniversary approaches, is re-considering its name and purpose.
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 | 0.007 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.469 | 0.312 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".