MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407795024 · doi:10.61841/6d743r46

Life-Changing Events in the Practice of a Homeopath: Emily Howard Jennings Stowe

2024· article· en· W4407795024 on OpenAlexaffabout
Carol Nash

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advance Research in Social Science and Humanities (ISSN 2208-2387) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchitecture, Design, and Social History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArt historyHistoryPsychoanalysisPhilosophyArtSociologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emily Howard Jennings Stowe is acclaimed as Canada’s first white openly female physician to practice medicine. This assessment of Stowe’s accomplishment is accurate because she practiced in the 19th century. However, by today’s definition of a physician, Stowe practiced homeopathy, since she did not engage in standardized allopathic medicine. Yet, no assessment of Stowe’s life-changing events developing her as a homeopath has been attempted until now. A unique narrative process following the tradition of psychoanalytic narratology is engaged based on responses to questions posed regarding her life, from those most objective and specific to those more subjective and general. This follows a prescribed order of question-asking: when, where, who, what, how, and why. The aim is to facilitate comparison and an interpretation of connections regarding her life-changing events as a homeopath. It is found that much of Stowe’s success originated from her family’s upper-class connections, and her Quaker religion’s belief in the intellectual equality of women to men, promoting her studious nature and encouraging her homeopathic education at home and in the United States. There were periods in her life that might have ended her career; however, the protective features of her status permitted her to withstand these difficulties successfully.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.441
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designQualitative
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advance Research in Social Science and Humanities (ISSN 2208-2387)Same topicArchitecture, Design, and Social HistoryFrench-language works237,207