MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

R<scp>e‐imaging</scp> W<scp>ar</scp>: T<scp>he</scp> V<scp>oice of</scp> W<scp>omen, the</scp> C<scp>anadian</scp> A<scp>id for</scp> V<scp>ietnam</scp> C<scp>ivilians, and the</scp> K<scp>nitting</scp> P<scp>roject for</scp> V<scp>ietnamese</scp> C<scp>hildren</scp>, 1966–1976

2009· article· en· W2070651887 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.

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

VenuePeace &amp Change · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsMount Saint Vincent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVietnameseLeagueCONTESTGender studiesVietnam WarHegemonyGirlPolitical scienceSociologyLawPsychologyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay focuses on a humanitarian knitting project to make dark camouflaged clothing for Vietnamese children residing in combat zones that was sponsored by the most significant Canadian peace association of the Vietnam War era, the Voice of Women/La Voix des Femmes (VOW). VOW members were inspired by an influential Canadian humanitarian group and aided by other North American women's peace groups—notably Women Strike for Peace and the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom. I will argue that the members of VOW sought to disrupt and contest the stereotypic Western image of the compliant and uncritical woman war worker by challenging an essentialized image of a girl or woman knitting for “her boys” during wartime. By placing the implicitly motherly female knitter in the service of the victimized Other (Vietnamese children), VOW women and their like‐minded sister peace activists in the United States helped to recast in critical fashion the hegemonic male‐privileged discourse of war in a manner unique to their gender and time.

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)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.204
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Bibliometrics, Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Bibliometrics, Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.386
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.204
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0220.024
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0220.015
Bibliometrics0.0190.029
Science and technology studies0.0280.022
Scholarly communication0.0200.017
Open science0.0310.009
Research integrity0.0150.022
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.009

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.236 · 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