Oswajanie przestrzeni "pomiędzy". Kino diasporyczne w kontekście kinematografii kanadyjskiej
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Justyna Kucharska Taming the Space „in-between.” Diasporic Cinema in the Context of Canadian Cinematography The article deals with the development of a new cinematic genre – diasporic cinema, which is a result of works created by representatives of dispersed groups. The signifiers of the genre and a brief survey of diasporic directors’ achievements have been outlined with reference to history and the organizational structure of Canadian cinematography stemming from cultural politics which mirrors ideas of multicultural policies. A brief outline of the history of Canadian cinema includes silent cinema, the turn of 1939, when National Film Board of Canada (NFB) was created, the October crisis of 1970 and trends of Canadian cinematography at the end of 20th century. Apart from the outline of documentary and feature works of Canadian directors the author of the text examines briefly the transformation of the concept of “diaspora” which has considerably broadened its designation at the end of 20th century. Delocalisation brings a new concept of “home” which in the context of migration loses its traditional physical meaning in favour of space being tamed in the country of residence and the process of migration itself. These tendencies are visible in the modern Canadian cinema whose analysis proves that Canada is still struggling to determine its own identity and constructing national cinematography.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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".