MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1830469401 · doi:10.14288/bcs.v0i125/6.1530

The Invented Indian/The Imagined Emily

2010· article· en· W1830469401 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Douglas L. Cole

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Collections · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLatin American and Latino Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsidePoliticsWorking classGender studiesHistoryPolitical scienceLawMedia studiesSociologyArt historyArtLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

EMILY CARR WAS A DEDICATED ARTIST AND WRITER. S h e w a s not a very politically or socially conscious person. Raised in cultivated gentility and respectability, as an adult she lived on inherited capital as a rentier and small-scale entrepreneur involved in private teaching, dog breeding, and souvenir making. She even speculated a little in real estate. Aside From contractual teaching in private schools for a few years in Vancouver (and working as a decorator in California), she never had a job. Indeed, the thought of entering the labour fojfce as public school teacher, for example, or stenographer, retail clerk, teller, or telephone operator was one she never seems to have entertained. Her unmarried sisters were similarly independent, Alice running her own elementary school classes and Lizzy being a physiotherapist. Carr was, all her idiosyncrasies and eccentricities aside, a woman of conservative temperament. She did do some politically charged cartoons for the Western Women s Weekly, a women's rights magazine, but otherwise her comments on the economic order, on class relations, and on political questions are very rare. We have no idea how, after women received the franchise, she cast her vote in any election (or, indeed, whether she voted at all). Few public events national, provincial, or municipal seem to have troubled her. World wars enter her concerns, of course, as did recessions, for they affected the rents she received. We know that she had harsh words for the single unemployed men who occupied the Vancouver Art Gallery in 1938, but, had it not been the gallery they

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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.152

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.007
Scholarly communication0.0090.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0450.016

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen CollectionsSame topicLatin American and Latino StudiesFrench-language works237,207