Bibliographic record
Abstract
bush culture for a bush country: unfinished manifesto bush is calling to some of us. it invites to add, multiply and supplement its signs and texts; to write straight off trail that is written through it; to continue trace that meanders and guides some of through its multiplicities, its polymorphic playfulness, its multivoicedness; and, of course, to leave that track and create others. a coming community? perhaps. something unnamed that is in and of bush. bush can be deployed as allegory for something some of desire, something some of us, those who carry western culture with every step of way, can almost touch but never quite reach. when many of are in bush, we bring with that which is not bush. so we travel uneasily through it. bush designates that vast part of country that remains outside of strip malls, covered for most part in rock, swamp, and water, though some of it is tundra and some of it is mountain and some of it is prairie. a bush culture is a culture that is of bush. and bush, unlike wilderness, allows to think a lived relation to and in this landscape. first nations cultures, in my view, are bush cultures. most important fracture - line in canadian culture is not and has never been linguistic one that separates franco from anglo. most important cultural fracture line has been division between aboriginal and - aboriginal, and conversations that cross this boundary. many other differences, literally, pale by comparison. but some part of canadian culture, that non - existent that pretends to claim us all, is also of bush. if we can have bush, if we can have our bush leagues, bush doctors, bush texts, bush bikes, bush pilots, bush whackers, bush radios, bush camps, we might as well imagine what it would be to have a bush country. we have been asked, enjoined, to think unthinkable (which is actually an rather than the unthinkable, which is actually a thinkable unthinkable): canada without quebec. what will happen, what will remain? what will happen, of course, can be specified with acute philosophical precision: nothing. nothing will happen when quebec leaves. we will barely awaken morning after to sleepwalk our way through other days. those of who are fortunate and privileged will go to our workplaces, drive or ride along same familiar roads, sit in same offices, read same newspapers. sky will sit firmly in its position. nothing will have happened. those who are not fortunate and privileged will continue, as before, to struggle to survive and to change society. canada is and will be that great postmodern nation for this precise reason: nothing ever happens here. that's why some of love it. at least, let this be shield under which we protect our subversive activities from normalizing gaze of imperial power we border. some calculators will undoubtedly be at work in some other offices, and these will have some long term material effects. interest rates will rise, one speculates; bond ratings will lower, and firmer voices in favour of government deficit - cutting will emerge in all their masculine strength to deploy their codes of discipline and restraint. and these things, which seem to go ahead regardless of quebec, will continue to be barely noticeable, except to those who are thrown from their jobs, houses, lives, as cost that never makes it into formulas of calculators. what will remain? this is question of moment. again, what will remain is, sadly, far too predictable. canada will remain canada. not english canada nor english speaking canada - a designation that has never had much accuracy - since at least in nunavut and denendeh questions of language will remain acute. nor t.r.o.c., rest of canada, a delightful acronym that only serves to centre quebec at expense of some of and identifies some of through our wounds. …
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".