MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400425784 · doi:10.29173/crossings274

Erased But Not Forgotten

2024· article· en· W4400425784 on OpenAlexaff
Haven Rice

Bibliographic record

VenueCrossings An Undergraduate Arts Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistoryArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Harlem Renaissance is a decade known for its fluidity and non-conformity that allowed for a thriving underground culture where Black queer Americans could organize and interact, as long as they remained hidden. While the queer community and the Black community flourished independently, the Black queer community was left behind in the wake of great progress for Black Americans, erased from the historical narrative despite its major contributions to Black and queer advancement. This presentation will examine how the Harlem Renaissance (1920s-1930s) fostered an underground network that allowed for the expression of the natural fluidity of sexuality and gender, unavailable to the heteronormative White Western society that existed above ground. Secondly, despite the Black queer community being credited for Black and queer progress, it was simultaneously victimized by a Black society so desperate for progress that it conformed to the colonial way, developing internalized racism and constructing an elite, heteronormative hierarchy through discursive distancing. This presentation will argue that the Black queer American experience of the Harlem Renaissance was erased from the historical narrative by White, Black, queer and straight masculinities, and that the repression of this community further subordinated both the Black and Queer communities.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.336 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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 venueCrossings An Undergraduate Arts JournalSame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207