Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis investigates the transformation of German-Canadian WWII family legacies as they are passed down through generations and between cultures. From a memory studies perspective, I examine my family’s archive of stories and artefacts as a case study, creating a memory project that interprets both autobiographical and co-produced texts created by my grandfather and I that describe his captivity in the American prisoner of war camp at Bad Kreuznach, Germany. In recounting these experiences, my grandfather’s texts construct and connect to post-war German discourses of guilt, victimization, and survivorship for his Canadian grandchildren. However, my involvement in mediating and representing his camp experiences reframes his stories to incorporate my third-generation German-Canadian perspective. Examining these texts, their creation, and our various identity positions within that process, I employ the concepts of intersubjective performance (Abrams, 2010) and traumatic representation (Caruth, 1996) in the analysis of my process of postmemory creation (Hirsch, 2008). It is my contention that this process can serve a therapeutic purpose, helping families comes to terms with traumatic legacies and difficult knowledge.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.031 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".