MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319572446 · doi:10.1525/phr.2014.83.1.162

Book Review: Oikawa, Cartographies of Violence: Japanese Canadian Women, Memory and the Subjects of the Internment, by John Price

2014· article· en· W2319572446 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePacific Historical Review · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAnthropology: Ethics, History, Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIconCitationDownloadHistoryArt historyMedia studiesLibrary scienceAdvertisingSociologyComputer scienceWorld Wide WebBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Book Review| February 01 2014 Book Review: Oikawa, Cartographies of Violence: Japanese Canadian Women, Memory and the Subjects of the Internment, by John Price Cartographies of Violence: Japanese Canadian Women, Memory and the Subjects of the Internment. By Mona Oikawa. (Toronto, University of Toronto Press, 2012. xix + 457 pp. $39.95 paper) John Price John Price University Of Victoria Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Pacific Historical Review (2014) 83 (1): 162–163. https://doi.org/10.1525/phr.2014.83.1.162 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation John Price; Book Review: Oikawa, Cartographies of Violence: Japanese Canadian Women, Memory and the Subjects of the Internment, by John Price. Pacific Historical Review 1 February 2014; 83 (1): 162–163. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/phr.2014.83.1.162 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentPacific Historical Review Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2014 by the Regents of the University of California2014 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.255 · 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