MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989291207 · doi:10.3138/ijcs.48.173

“Une femme bien en vue”: Adrienne Clarkson and the Media

2014· article· en· W1989291207 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Eva‐Marie Kröller

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Canadian Studies · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPraiseGovernorCriticismMandateMedia studiesSociologyLawPolitical scienceArtEngineeringLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the first Chinese-Canadian woman to occupy the position of Governor-General of Canada, Adrienne Clarkson attracted special attention from the start of her appointment. However, both the praise for her performance and the criticism of her alleged shortcomings drew extensively on reports in the media that accompanied her previous work, over several decades, as a journalist, editor, and diplomat. Clarkson’s travels in the company of representatives from the arts, sciences, and commerce were a special target, yet Clarkson has cited these, along with the lessons learned during past travels including a trip to China in pursuit of her heritage, as proof of a successfully fulfilled mandate. Thus, Canada’s House: Rideau Hall and the Invention of a Canadian Home (2004), a book produced by the historian Margaret MacMillan and others “in conversation with Adrienne Clarkson and John Ralston Saul,” describes Rideau Hall as the focal point of international mobility. This article looks at women and the office of Governor-General in Canada, including the “chatelaines” (Governor-Generals’ spouses), concentrating on middlebrow sources and paying special attention to the motif of travel. The purpose is to study the media coverage of the various roles Adrienne Clarkson has played in her professional life as a flashpoint of Canadian attitudes toward ambitious professional women generally and high-aiming ethnic women specifically.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.791
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Canadian StudiesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207