MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977473610 · doi:10.1080/13645145.2014.908504

Locating<i>Pays de Galles</i>in the twenty-first century: dynamic model or forgotten world?

2014· article· en· W1977473610 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kathryn N. Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Travel Writing · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies of British Isles
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersArts and Humanities Research Council
KeywordsWelshDevolution (biology)PoliticsRepresentation (politics)TourismDestinationsFrenchHistoryEthnologyNarrativeNational identityIdentity (music)Travel writingSociologyGeographyHumanitiesGenealogyAnthropologyPolitical scienceArtLawAestheticsArchaeologyLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In spite of the increased profile of Welsh national identity in the post-devolutionary age, the role of travellers and in particular travel writers in representing Wales beyond its borders remains largely unstudied. This essay explores the contrasting constructions of Wales, Welsh political structures and cultural landscapes at the dawn of the twenty-first century offered by two francophone travel narratives by Quebecois Dominic Ménard-Bilodeau (2004) and Breton Jean-Yves Le Disez (2006). It investigates how the travellers' divergent discursive axes and respective emphases on heritage and ethnic tourism result in polarised perceptions of contemporary Wales as a romanticised and mysterious forgotten world on the one hand, and a vibrant and dynamic model to be emulated by non-state nations on the other. By examining the extent of the travellers' political awareness of Wales, the essay probes the possible effects of devolution on travellers' evolving perceptions of Wales and its representation in travel literature.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.266
Threshold uncertainty score0.529

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.015
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in Travel WritingSame topicHistorical Studies of British IslesFrench-language works237,207