MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1487906220

Reading The Bricklin : Narrating the Place of Dreaming in an Era of Self-Sufficiency

2013· article· en· W1487906220 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jennifer Andrews

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of New Brunswick Studies / Revue d’études sur le Nouveau-Brunswick · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFantasyHumanitiesReading (process)ArtLiteraturePolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Bricklin: An Automotive Fantasy traces the rise and fall of efforts to build Malcolm Bricklin’s signature sports car in rural New Brunswick in the early 1970s. I read The Bricklin as an effort by contemporary Atlantic Canadian writers and artists to highlight how the history of place shapes experience without replicating formulaic conceptions of rural life on the East Coast. Rather than subverting festishized versions of an anti-modern Atlantic Canada, The Bricklin both critiques and celebrates the nostalgic exploration of place. Resume The Bricklin: An Automotive Fantasy retrace l’essor et le declin des efforts deployes pour construire la voiture de sport signee Malcolm Bricklin en region rurale du Nouveau-Brunswick dans le debut des annees 1970. J’ai considere The Bricklin comme un effort des ecrivains et artistes contemporains du Canada atlantique a souligner a quel point l’histoire d’une region faconne l’experience sans pour autant se rattacher aux conceptions stereotypees de la vie rurale de la cote Est. De fait, The Bricklin reussit a la fois a critiquer et celebrer l’exploration nostalgique d’un endroit plutot que de renverser des versions fetichisees d’un Canada atlantique anti-moderniste.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.356
Threshold uncertainty score0.716

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0220.024
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of New Brunswick Studies / Revue d’études sur le Nouveau-BrunswickSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207