MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Women in Zimbabwe

2024· reference-entry· en· W4398183763 on OpenAlexaff
Ruramisai Charumbira

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford Research Encyclopedia of African History · 2024
Typereference-entry
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican studies and sociopolitical issues
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Women, as part of communities, societies, and nations, have, on one hand, participated in national mythmaking, however “nation” has been defined. On the other hand, women, have also been some of the fiercest opponents of the idea of the nation, as its self-definition often subjected them—and all those deemed deviant—to hetero-patriarchal violence, physically and otherwise. Women in Zimbabwe since the late 1800s, when that country became the British colony of Southern Rhodesia, have been integral to that country’s history, despite periodic historiographical invisibility. Thus, in the long and short arcs of Zimbabwe’s history, women’s historical and contemporary lives have been interpreted teleologically and ontologically. The teleological is in the literature that writes women as destined to be subservient to men across time. The ontological is in the literature that writes not only of women’s agency but their connectedness to their communities, societies, and the larger world. The triumph of contemporary women in Zimbabwe, against fierce patriarchal odds, is the reclamation of voice and space in visible and invisible ways in that country. The tragedy, of course, is the long shadow cast by virulent patriarchal nationalisms of both colonial and postindependent Zimbabwe that has dispersed millions of people into the diaspora around the world. For women, and the people of Zimbabwe writ large, hope is not a noun but a verb. Refusing to give up is an act of defiance and a claim to life.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.388
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford Research Encyclopedia of African HistorySame topicAfrican studies and sociopolitical issuesFrench-language works237,207