Advertisements of Heresies: A Feminist Publication on Art and Politics
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>AdArchive</i> expands feminist periodical scholarship with an innovative focus on advertisements from feminist-identified journals. AdArchive’s research indicates that, despite their political differences and frequent struggles to stay afloat, feminist periodicals rarely viewed each other as competitors in the magazine market. Instead, magazines encouraged their readers to expand their engagement with feminist movements by including advertisements for other feminist magazines, events, activities, and enterprises in the back pages of each issue.<br><br>This dataset assembles records of advertisements contained in <i>Heresies</i>, a feminist art magazine that was published in New York from 1977 to 1992. Approximately 210 advertisements from 27 issues of the magazine are described. The advertisements in Heresies frequently promote other magazines, which allows for a rich exploration of networks of feminist cultural production and interconnected social movements.<br><br>The data has been transformed into Linked Open Data via the LINCS conversion toolkit of the the Linked Infrastructure for Networked Cultural Scholarship (LINCS) project. The data is assembled as a single text file in text/turtle (.ttl) and contains descriptive metadata that has been reconciled into triples using established linked data vocabularies.<br><br>AdArchive has been supported by funding from SSHRC.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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