MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1527867902

Public Policy and the Mariposa Folk Festival: Shared Ideals in the 1960s and 1970s

2011· article· en· W1527867902 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueMUSICultures · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpenness to experienceMusicalMulticulturalismContext (archaeology)TimelineGovernment (linguistics)Public policySociologyPolitical scienceHistoryVisual artsArtLawPsychologyPedagogy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Mariposa Folk Festival’s most well-documented decades are the 1960s and 1970s, during which it was known for its support of budding Canadian talent and its openness to diverse musical traditions. However, its early programming decisions have not been examined within the context of broader trends in Canadian society. Given the era’s climate of “Canadian content” and “multiculturalism,” was the MFF’s artistic direction merely a reflection of newly-established government policies, or can the musical programming be attributed to progressive decision-making on the part of festival organizers? This paper addresses such questions by examining early MFF programming against a federal policy timeline.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.752
Threshold uncertainty score0.746

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.198 · 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