MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404718392 · doi:10.4324/9781003539971-20

Millicent Garrett Fawcett: a Victorian liberal feminist?

2024· book-chapter· en· W4404718392 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Barbara Caine

Bibliographic record

VenueCrossing boundaries · 2024
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies on Reproduction, Gender, Health, and Societal Changes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtSociologyMedia studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Millicent Garrett Fawcett (1847-1929), was one of the leaders of the English women’s suffrage movement. The longest-serving worker in this campaign, she began her participation as a very young member of the first Women’s Suffrage Committee in London which formed in 1867, emerging formally as its leader in 1897, when she became president of the National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies. She finally retired from this position in 1918, feeling that the movement should now be led by younger women—and that her advanced age entitled her to indulge her hatred of the committee work in which she had been immersed for decades (Strachey, 1931:330). In the light of this, it is not surprising that the memorial to her in Westminster Abbey describes her as having ‘won citizenship for women’ (Oakley, 1983:184). But Fawcett was not only a suffragist: she was active as a lobbyist, a lecturer and a propagandist in several other campaigns as well. She worked in the campaign to extend higher education to women, in the battles to gain entry for women to medicine and to the other professions and to prevent the exclusion of women from a number of industrial occupations. She was particularly active in a number of campaigns to prevent the sexual exploitation of women and young girls and to establish an equal moral standard for women and men.

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)0.000
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 categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.852
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0210.016
Scholarly communication0.0230.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.268
Teacher spread0.210 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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 venueCrossing boundariesSame topicHistorical Studies on Reproduction, Gender, Health, and Societal ChangesFrench-language works237,207