MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1882093193 · doi:10.14288/bcs.v0i39.985

Chinese Imprints in British Columbia

2010· article· en· W1882093193 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David Lai

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Collections · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural History and Identity Formation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Various ethnic groups have brought their cultural traits with them to Canada and left on the Canadian landscape imprints ranging from visible features such as farm patterns, house forms, restaurants and folk festivals to invisible impressions such as aroma, music and languages.Not the least of these groups, the Chinese people created a unique urban enclave which is commonly known as "Chinatown."Traces of Chinese imprints are most apparent and numerous in British Columbia, where nearly all the Chinese in Canada came and settled during the three decades between the late 1850s to the 1880s.British Columbia had and still has the largest number of Chinese people in Canada (fig. 1).In 1971, their population in the province numbered 44,315, which represented about 37 percent of the total Chinese population in the country. 2 The purpose of this paper is to study various forms of Chinese imprints in British Columbia.Chinese imprints in the province can be classified into four main groups.The first and most apparent group includes many tangible and relatively permanent features such as buildings constructed and decorated in Chinese styles, Chinese social and educational institutions, vegetables that originated in China, and the like.The architectural features of "Chinatown" are characterized by recessed balconies, upturned eaves and roof corners, extended eaves covering the main balcony, and structural components such as tiled roofs and circular, moon-shaped windows and doors (fig.2).Dominant motifs are dragons, phoenixes, lions and tigers, which are carved or painted on columns, walls and shop signs.Imperial gold, mandarin red, emerald green, golden yellow and other brilliant colours are used to highlight the decorative details.Signboards, street signs, advertisements and notice boards are written both in Chinese characters and English letters.Pagodas, lanterns, bowls and chopsticks and other typical Oriental objects are the ornamented components commonly used 1 Acknowledgement is given to the University of Victoria for its financial support in this research project. 2 Census of Canada, 1971 Bulletin 1-32, Table 2, p. 2-1.20

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.151

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.007
Science and technology studies0.0090.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.213 · 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueOpen Collections→Same topicCultural History and Identity Formation→French-language works237,207→