MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2550840411 · doi:10.1057/978-1-137-43543-9_6

Acadiana and the Cajun Cultural Space: Adaptation, Accommodation, and Authenticity

2016· book-chapter· en· W2550840411 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kevin V. Mulcahy

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave Macmillan US eBooks · 2016
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFolkloreTreatyPopulationState (computer science)GeographyGenealogyEthnologyNova scotiaAccommodationHistorySociologyArchaeologyLawPolitical scienceDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter evaluates the French culture of the Acadiana area of Southwest Louisiana, which comprises 22 of the state’s 64 parishes and 30 percent of the state’s population of some 4 million. It is called Acadiana, after the original Canadian land from which the population came, what was called Acadie (comprising what is now Nova Scotia with parts of New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island). The word Cajun is most likely a corruption of Acadian although, as will be seen time and again herein, very little about folkloric tradition can be stated with certainty. The original French Canadians of Acadie were intentionally expelled by the British form the North American territory ceded to Great Britain by the Treaty of Urecht in 1715. This is referred to as Le Grand Dérangement and is immortalized in Longfellow’s poem “Evangeline.” 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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.424
Threshold uncertainty score0.853

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0150.010
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalgrave Macmillan US eBooksSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207