MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407375470 · doi:10.1353/vpr.2024.a951296

Victorian Feminist Periodicals and the New Indian Woman: Indian Women’s Interviews in the Women’s Penny Paper and the Woman’s Signal

2024· article· en· W4407375470 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tarini Bhamburkar

Bibliographic record

VenueVictorian periodicals review · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTravel Writing and Literature
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGender studiesHistorySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: This article traces the Women’s Penny Paper and Woman’s Signal ’s reporting of an emerging Indian feminism. These feminist periodicals published groundbreaking interviews with two Indian women reformers: the social reformer Pandita Ramabai Saraswati in 1889 and the women’s rights advocate Shevantibai Nikambe in 1896. These were the only two Indian women, and the only racial minority, given full-length features on their front pages. By analyzing these interviews in the context of the New Woman in both colony and metropole, this article considers how Ramabai and Shevantibai used this journalistic opportunity to fashion modern, cosmopolitan identities for themselves while also subtly interrogating Anglocentric perceptions and stereotypes.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 venueVictorian periodicals reviewSame topicTravel Writing and LiteratureFrench-language works237,207