Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this, the first issue, an unthemed one, of Girlhood Studies of the new quarter-century, there is a beautiful lining up of what must surely be regarded as evidence of transnationalism in that although each author is from a different country—Canada, Ghana, Indonesia, Japan, Israel, the United States, and Australia—the concerns are relevant internationally: the privileging of white heterosexual girls; the imposition of cultural taboos and rules on menstruating girls; the frequent failure to understand the differing realities of girls; the subversive potential of girls to undermine sexist privilege; the need for empowered girls still having to navigate disciplinary practices; and the ways in which changing social conditions govern the treatment of even pre-school-age girls. Appropriately enough, we end this issue with a review of one of the books, Girls in Global Development: Figurations of Gendered Power (2023), in the Berghahn series, Transnational Girlhoods. This range, which might, on the one hand, seem accidental, suggests, on the other, the rich body of feminist work that is inspired by girls’ successes as well as by daunting needs that result from inequalities.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.066 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".