Bibliographic record
Abstract
“By all accounts, the second Intifada broke out in September of 2000 following a highly publicized and controversial visit by Ariel Sharon to the Haram As-Sharif / Temple Mount site in Jerusalem. However, few aspects of the Intifada are as uncontested and straightforward as this. One dimension of the complexity of the Intifada is the way in which it is discursively enmeshed with the reproduction of (Western) hegemonic notions of modernity, sovereignty and Orientalism. In this paper I explore one site of the discursive constitution of the Intifada, and its connection to these hegemonic notions in two ways. First, using the methods of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), I look carefully at the construction of the Intifada in the Globe And Mail from 1988 to 2003. For the purposes of this paper I will, rather broadly, define CDA as an analysis of the interstices of the semiotic and the social which takes a linguistically grounded approach and which focuses its gaze on transparent--that is invisible--relations of power and authority, aiming to denaturalize them through deconstructing the discourses which, in part, constitute them (for a more Zoe Wool is a doctoral candidate in the department of anthropology at the University of Toronto.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".