MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2504843798 · doi:10.1057/9780230244900_11

Impossible Historical Reenactments: Invisible Aborigines on TV

2009· book-chapter· en· W2504843798 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chris Healy

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · 2009
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAustralian History and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousWhite (mutation)Television seriesPerformance artMedia studiesHistoryGenealogyQuarter (Canadian coin)Art historyVisual artsArtGeographySociologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the late 1960s at my Melbourne school, Manningham Primary, films were screened during the holidays, presumably to keep us off the street in those brief respites from formal instruction. The format, as I remember it, was a feature such as Born Free —a film that never failed to bring forth a flood of tears—preceded by a “short.” More than once, that short came from the television series Alcheringa , a prize-winning 1962 ABC program of 12 quarter-hour episodes, initially broadcast weekly, that recreated, romantically and anthropologically, an imagined world of everyday indigenous practices “before the coming of the white man.” The series was written and directed by Frank Few, an American-born director who also made some of the first wildlife or nature documentaries in Australia, and hosted by Bill Onus, a Yorta Yorta man. The cast members were all indigenous. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.012
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooksSame topicAustralian History and SocietyFrench-language works237,207