MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038731411 · doi:10.2307/3092218

The Politics of Population: State Formation, Statistics, and the Census of Canada, 1840-1875

2002· article· en· W2038731411 on OpenAlex
Colin Read, Bruce Curtis

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of American History · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCensusPoliticsState (computer science)PopulationHistoryAmerican Community SurveyGenealogyLibrary scienceDemographyMedia studiesSociologyPolitical scienceLawMathematicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The sociologist Bruce Curtis, whose works on state formation and education in old Ontario are well regarded, has produced an important examination of mid-nineteenth-century Canadian censuses. Non-Canadianists will be interested in Curtis's discussion of the literature surrounding census making and his conclusions that “censuses are made, not taken.” Censuses involve artificially constructed categories, such as household head or national origin, which oblige populations to cast themselves into such categories, the better to be governed. Curtis's arguments are bolstered by the insights of many theorists. In the background are those of Antonio Gramsci, as Curtis argues that hegemonic classes or segments of society can use the census to bolster “social imaginaries” simply by casting them into official terminology. On the other hand, he maintains that Michel Foucault's notions of population and its “gov-ernmentality” are at once too simple and too confused to illuminate such a modern state-making endeavor as the census.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.402
Threshold uncertainty score0.806

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.195 · 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