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
This article employs a methodology of locational fashion cultures, which is still under-defined and under-utilized in Fashion Studies, from the interdisciplinary intersections of cultural analysis, cultural history, cultural and media representations of fashion in urban contexts, to help us understand fashion beyond its economic value and systems. As case studies and examples of this methodology, this article outlines four books from my Urban Chic book series (published by Intellect) that examine Berlin, Vienna, Montreal, and Copenhagen cultures through the lens of fashion. The cities in these books are not often considered canonical fashion capitals like Paris, London, and New York, but each has unique and vibrant fashion cultures. By examining their respective fashion cultures, we can investigate the ways in which fashion can be re-inscribed with cultural values independent from its material or trend-driven obsolescence. The article also provides a summary of the various ways in which fashion cultures and fashion cities have been defined and described by fashion scholars to date. It concludes with some suggestions and questions that may be posed in order to analyze and highlight locational fashion cultures.
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) | 0.019 | 0.005 |
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