Literary Interactions between China and Canada: Literary Activities in the Chinese Community from the Late Qing Dynasty to the Present
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite more than a century of discrimination and obstacles, the Chinese in Canada persevered and continued to engage in various kinds of cultural activities. They never gave up reaching out from the confined space of Chinatown. Taking a practical rather than theoretical approach, this essay draws on newspapers and other records to reconstruct the cultural life of Chinese in Canada and to present a different picture of the once misunderstood, if not marginalized community. The juxtaposition of cultural-interaction in general and literary-interaction in particular progressed in two periods: from the gold rush of the 1850s to 1967 (the year Canada implemented the new immigration policy based on points not on race) and the period since 1968. The early period witnessed an intensive involvement of cultural activities—such as newspaper reading, book clubs, regular poetry contests, Cantonese opera, and modern plays; the later period, a more open and diversified type of interaction that went beyond and across the boundaries of the Chinese communities—such as the Chinese Canadian Writers’ Association, founded in 1987.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".