MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005849189 · doi:10.1353/mfs.2003.0026

Speculative Fictions: Contemporary Canadian Novelists and the Writing of History (review)

2003· article· en· W2005849189 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueModern fiction studies · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicShort Stories in Global Literature
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeorge (robot)MetafictionIdentity (music)LiteraturePhraseHistoryHistory of literatureArt historyArtClassicsPhilosophyNarrativeAestheticsLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a seminal essay, originally published in the mid-1980s, Linda Hutcheon coined the phrase "Canadian historiographic metafiction" to describe a flowering literary genre that has a genuinely Canadian flavor and focuses on the act of writing about Canadian history and identity. Herb Wyile's Speculative Fictions is the most recent study of this genre, and the author is to be commended for bringing the discussion up-to-date by discussing not only classics such as Timothy Findley's The Wars, Rudy Wiebe's The Scorched-Wood People, and George Bowering's Burning Water but also new developments in recent works by writers such as Jane Urquhart, Margaret Sweatman, Thomas Wharton, Guy Vanderhaeghe, and Wayne Johnston.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.516

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.189 · 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