Bibliographic record
Abstract
Japanese immigration to Canada commenced during the latter part of the 19th century and the first two decades of the 20th century. 1908 marked the beginning of the "family-building" phase for Japanese immigrants in Canada. Married men, who had decided to remain in Canada, were now calling their wives and children over from Japan. But it was the single men who wanted to change their nomadic existence - as well as to relieve the pressure on them to marry - that accounted for the continuous immigration of women across the Pacific. Some men returned to Japan to have marriages arranged (the miai-kekkon). But the favourite and most practical scheme was the "picture bride" plan, which began with an exchange of photographs after relatives of the immigrant had sought out a woman whom they regarded as suitable. If the potential groom was influenced at all by the photograph, he would write to his relatives and instruct them to register their "marriage" in Japan. Furthermore, after an exchange of letters between the now married couple, the woman would then travel to Canada as his bride after the groom had arranged for a passport and travel expenses. In most cases the parties were complete strangers, and the union was based essentially on the couple's suitability to be helpmates in the struggles of a new life in Canada. To marry as a "picture bride" was almost exclusively determined by the limited available options for the Meiji era women. They recognized that remaining single was socially unacceptable in Japanese society, so they chose to be picture brides as their only viable option for marriage, and for a number of valid reasons. It was a choice that would inevitably change the future course of their lives, but one that stabilized the Japanese community in Canada so that a secure future was procurable for all the Japanese immigrants.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 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".