MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095325754 · doi:10.7202/021796ar

Mark I Role Model and Inspiring Catalyst : Some Characteristics from a Perspective of Four Decades

2005· article· en· W2095325754 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Peter H. Nash

Bibliographic record

VenueCahiers de géographie du Québec · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical Geography and Geographical Thought
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Style (visual arts)SociologyHistoryArtArchaeologyVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Raoul Blanchard's impact on geographic thought in Canada can be summarized in five major categories: 1) a methodical seeder of geographic ideas during regular visits in a land which he loved ; 2) a provider of a tangible methodology to colleagues and students in Québec ; 3) a regionalist who transplanted the approach acquired from his mentor and fused it with his own individual synthesizing technique; 4) a networker who possessed a remarkable personal style of communication; and 5) a philosopher malgré lui who embraced and intertwined a number of epistemologies and stated that he rejected them all. Blanchard's three thousand plus pages on Canada constitute a scholarly, reliable, and readable base for first generation Canadian (Mark I) francophone geography. He was an inspiring catalyst and personal friend of the author and many of his contemporaries, and more importantly a Promethean progenitor to second and third generation Canadian geographers.

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)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.234
Threshold uncertainty score0.570

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0180.022
Scholarly communication0.0150.005
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCahiers de géographie du QuébecSame topicHistorical Geography and Geographical ThoughtFrench-language works237,207