MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1617289440 · doi:10.5212/uniletras.v32i2.3095

Multiculturalismo na literatura canadense - Doi: 10.5212/Uniletras.v.32i2.0006

2010· article· pt· W1617289440 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ana Lúcia Bittencourt, Neide Garcia Pinheiro, Eunice Pereira Guimarães

Bibliographic record

VenueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) · 2010
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiterature, Culture, and Criticism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticulturalismHonorDignityDiversity (politics)Identity (music)CriticismPoliticsSociologyInterpretation (philosophy)Gender studiesImmigrationEthnic groupAestheticsPolitical scienceLawAnthropologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada is often described as a multicultural nation. This means that Canadians do not have a single cultural background; instead Canadians are the result of racial miscegenation and cultural diversity. In other words, Canadians reflect a vast diversity of cultural heritages and ethnic groups. This multicultural diversity is the result of decades of immigration. Charles Taylor is a Canadian philosopher concerned with the politics of recognition and identity. He rises above the raging polemics that often characterize discussions of identity groups and offers a fair-minded assessment of the role they play in democracies. With the move from honor to dignity, the questions of identity and multiculturalism have become the target of political discussions, emphasizing the equality of all citizens. The aim of this paper is to discuss how Taylor’s theory has been seen as a new possibility of interpretation in Canadian literary theory and criticism.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.235
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas)Same topicLiterature, Culture, and CriticismFrench-language works237,207