MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029693556 · doi:10.1525/tph.2009.31.1.46

Experts on Our Own Lives: Commemorating Canada at the Beginning of the 21st Century

2009· article· en· W2029693556 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the 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

VenueThe Public Historian · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian GovernmentParks Canada
KeywordsGrassrootsEnthusiasmInjusticePoliticsInvisibilityEthnic groupPolitical scienceGender studiesMedia studiesSociologyHistoryLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article highlights the contested nature of public commemoration in Canada. Vigorous grassroots enthusiasm for commemoration is compared with the evolving commitment of the Historic Sites and Monuments Board, one of Canada's senior players in national commemoration. The article begins by pointing to the ongoing attention to history that pervades contemporary movement politics among the First Nations, ethno-cultural groups, women, and workers. It next considers recent popular efforts at commemoration, with a particular focus on those targeting ethnic and racial injustice, violence against women, and the invisibility of workers. It then considers the role of the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada from its founding in 1919 to the present. Ultimately, it asks what grassroots and official actors in historical commemoration contribute to the maintenance of public memory.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.206 · 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