Entre les empires : les cultural studies canadiennes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article est le texte d’une conférence donnée sur la préparation de la première anthologie canadienne de cultural studies (2009). La parution d’un tel ouvrage soulève des questions importantes à propos de l’idée de tradition intellectuelle et de la prégnance des imaginaires de la nation et du national dans notre compréhension de la culture. Cette conférence, comme le livre qu’elle présente, fait état des ambivalences qui caractérisent généralement les cultural studies, et les cultural studies canadiennes en particulier. L’idée de ce projet editorial n’était pas de pas de créer un ensemble canonique d’écrits sur le Canada, ou qui refléterait la profondeur d’une quelconque essence canadienne, mais plutôt de saisir la logique des formations spécifiques de celle-ci, en les mettant en lien avec les intuitions les plus pertinentes et les plus stimulantes que nous offrent les cultural studies qui sont pratiquées un peu partout.
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 | 0.008 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.026 | 0.054 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".