MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W223419858 · doi:10.3138/jcs.37.4.68

“Our Dear North Country”: Regional Identity and National Meaning in Ontario’s Georgian Bay

2003· article· en· W223419858 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Claire Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Canadian Studies · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeorgianMeaning (existential)ArchipelagoIdentity (music)NationalismBayShoreHistorySociologyEthnologyGeographyArchaeologyAestheticsOceanographyLawPolitical scienceArtGeologyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The maturation of regional perspectives, and the accompanying development of distinct regional identities based on landscape, is a story that lies at the heart of Canadian history. With time and experience, people gradually came to think of the east shore of Georgian Bay - an archipelago known as the “Thirty Thousand Islands” - as a separate place, distinct even from adjacent sections of the Great Lakes and Ontario’s “near north.” This essay looks at this process of adaptation from three angles. Artists and writers struggled to create a language appropriate to the place, most famously in works by the Group of Seven. Residents on the islands developed a community identity that emphasized the differences and practical concerns of life in a rugged maritime environment. As this Shield landscape became laden with nationalist meaning, however, place-specific images like the leaning pine were exported as generic symbols of the northland.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.548

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0260.013
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.282
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.

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

Citations13
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Canadian StudiesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207