MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1502340535

Making Kouchibouguac: Acadians, the Creation of a National Park, and the Politics of Documentary Film during the 1970s

2010· article· en· W1502340535 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ronald Rudin

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceOpposition (politics)National parkPopulationPoliticsArtSociologyHistoryLawArchaeologyDemography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The documentary film Kouchibouguac, released by the Office national du film (ONF) in 1979, allowed Acadians – who had been removed from their lands to allow the creation of the national park of the same name – to tell their stories. This article explores the making of the film, with a particular focus upon the difficulties experienced by Acadians trying to find their voice within the Québécois-dominated ONF. It also reflects on the form of the film as well as the impact that it had within an Acadian population that was divided over the sporadically violent opposition to the park.
\n
\nSorti en 1979, le film documentaire Kouchibouguac, de l’Office national du film (ONF), a permis aux Acadiens qui avaient été forcés de quitter leurs terres afin de permettre la création du parc national du même nom de raconter leur histoire. Cet article explore la production de ce film en portant une attention particulière aux difficultés que les Acadiens ont rencontrées en essayant de trouver leur voix à l’intérieur de l’ONF, dominé par des Québécois. Il examine aussi le film sur le plan de la forme ainsi que l’impact qu’il a eu parmi une population acadienne divisée par l’opposition parfois violente à la création du parc.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.935
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.262 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University)Same topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207