Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
I first met Sneja Gunew at a Women’s Studies conference in Wollongong in 1981. Together with Louise Adler, she gave a presentation, ‘Method and Madness in Female Writing’, which made a challenging intervention into this gathering. Intervention was her preferred practice of intellectual responsibility and challenge her characteristic style. I joined the staff at Deakin in 1985-1986, and during that time Sneja and I became firm friends, and her work influenced mine considerably. As well as teaching literary studies at Deakin we both contributed to the interdisciplinary course, ‘Women and Social Change’, which led to Sneja’s editing the companion volumes Feminist Knowledge as Critique and Construct and A Reader in Feminist Knowledge. As well as her influential work on multiculturalism and her interventions into the rapidly developing world of feminist studies, Sneja took on the male establishment, mainly through a series of contributions to debates around the publication of Ken Ruthven’s Feminist Literary Studies (1984) and subsequently on ‘the new humanities’. On the brink of her departure for Canada in 1993 Sneja’s essay, ‘Feminism and Difference,’ again challenged any feminist work that claimed to speak for all women, including those minoritised in terms of race or class. Whether the issue was women’s liberation or multiculturalism, creative practice or cultural policy, Sneja always emphasised difference and diversity, and made it her business to deconstruct any assumptions of uniformity, or of a neutral speaking position.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it