MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987147619 · doi:10.7202/031106ar

The Masculine Mountie: The Royal Canadian Mounted Police as a Male Institution, 1914-1939

2006· article· en· W1987147619 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Steve Hewitt

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Historical Association · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDominionInstitutionPeriod (music)Work (physics)Ethnic groupPolitical scienceCriminologyLawGender studiesHistorySociologyEngineeringAestheticsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1914 to 1939 was a very important period in the history of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP). The Force found its very existence threatened. It also was transformed as it lost and then regained a role at the provincial level of policing, found itself amalgamated with the Dominion Police in 1920, and experienced widely fluctuating personnel levels throughout the period. Finally, it took on a security/intelligence role that would last until 1984. “The Masculine Mountie” looks at the Mounted Police in this era. Specifically the paper uses gender and ethnic analysis to explore the values and characteristics of the RCMP and how they affected the work it performed. Who Mounties were leads directly into what they did. These two aspects are very related, a reality that is too often ignored in much of the writing about Canada's national police force. Finally, the paper connects these various threads in an effort to deal with the important question of why the RCMP survived and prospered in its era of great uncertainty.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.138
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0500.014
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.197 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Historical AssociationSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207