MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045114579 · doi:10.15353/cjds.v3i3.176

Review of Facing Eugenics by Erika Dyck

2014· article· en· W2045114579 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Jen Rinaldi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Disability Studies · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedical History and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ontario Institute of Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEugenicsPoliticsSterilization (economics)SociologyLawPolitical scienceGender studiesGenealogyHistoryPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Facing Eugenics: Reproduction, Sterilization, and the Politics of Choice, Erika Dyck constructs a social history of the Alberta sterilization program. Each chapter revolves around a case study that illustrates the deeper political undercurrents to reproductive choice in Canada. The author intends the work to locate “the Canadian experience within these broader trends while focusing on how these issues played out for individual Albertans” (20).

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.445

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.010
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.224 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Disability StudiesSame topicMedical History and ResearchFrench-language works237,207