Advertisements of Heresies: A Feminist Publication on Art and Politics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AdArchive 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. This dataset assembles records of advertisements contained in Heresies, 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. 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. 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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.046 | 0.015 |
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".