MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6980405409

The Canadian and Argentinian textile industry: Gender and working process, 1888-1951, an exploratory research from Political Economy of Gender perspective

2019· article· en· W6980405409 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueConicet · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArgentine historical studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork (physics)CapitalismExploratory researchUnpaid workPerspective (graphical)Domestic workPoliticsWomen's work
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper I analyze the working process of the Canadian and Argentinian textile industry between 1888 and 1951. Based in Buenos Aires and Montreal as case studies, these two cities concentrated the textile industry in the two countries. I approach this historical process from a gender, social history and economic perspective, doing an original research of the working process since I include the unpaid domestic work as part of it. The starting point of this analysis is that capitalism is patriarchal. One of the main conclusions of this work is that the women workers had not two workdays (unpaid domestic work and workday), but only one extended workday that included the domestic work and their work in the factory, for which they received a minimum paid. These workdays had a duration of roughly 17 or 19 hours in Canada or Argentina, respectively. Finally, in this work I demonstrate that gender relationships cannot be excluded of the study of the working process.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.367

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0120.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.179
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.213 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConicetSame topicArgentine historical studiesFrench-language works237,207