MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026549212 · doi:10.1353/his.0.0060

Same-sex Intersections of the Prairie Settlement Era: The 1895 Case of Regina's "Oscar Wilde"

2009· article· fr· W2026549212 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Lyle Dick

Bibliographic record

VenueHistoire sociale · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsFrontierSociologySettlement (finance)Gender studiesMoralityPopulationReification (Marxism)HistoryEthnologyDemographyPolitical scienceLawArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Une affaire impliquant trois hommes accusés de grossière indécence à Regina en 1895 sert à illustrer différents aspects de l'expérience homosexuelle à l'époque de la colonisation de l'Ouest canadien. Cette étude micro-historique situe le cas tant dans le contexte local que dans ceux, plus vastes, de la politique, du droit et de la société, y compris dans la perspective de la visibilité croissante des sous-cultures du même sexe dans la Grande-Bretagne de la fin du XIX e siècle. Les hommes repré sentant la majorité de la population de la ville frontière qu'était Regina, ce qui a créé un environnement social masculin propice à l'établissement d'un espace ouvert à la tenue de rencontres du même sexe et beaucoup plus permissif que le milieu social intolérant qui allait avoir vu le jour à la Première Guerre mondiale. Si la moralité évangélique avait fait son apparition dans les années 1890, c'est tout de même avec une certaine clémence qu'on jugea le principal accusé. À l'époque, la diabolisation du défendeur dans la presse, qui le qualifiait d'« Oscar Wilde », a enclenché un processus de réification de l'expérience et des identités homosexuelles qui s'est par la suite solidement enraciné au XX e siècle.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.833
Threshold uncertainty score0.332

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0390.026
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0040.008
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistoire socialeSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207