MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2598927000 · doi:10.3138/topia.36.5

In Relation: Indigenous and Black Excursions on Our Now

2016· article· en· W2598927000 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rinaldo Walcott

Bibliographic record

VenueTOPIA Canadian Journal of Cultural Studies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousPoliticsGender studiesSocial movementQueerContext (archaeology)SociologyRelation (database)Collective actionPolitical scienceMedia studiesHistoryLawArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relation of Idle No More to Black Lives Matter as movements and organiza¬tions is undeniable. In each case women are credited with starting the organizations and significantly impacting the larger social movements of which the organizations are a major element and powerful driving force. Jessica Gordon, Sheelah McLean, Sylvia McAdam and Nina Wilson, the founders of Idle No More, and Alicia Garza, Opal Tometi and Patrisse Cullors of Black Lives Matter represent a new moment in social movement organizing in which people identifying as women, queer and trans have taken the public leadership roles in direct action and grass roots organizing in a fashion not so clearly witnessed before. Their collective actions have brought significant attention to Indigenous and Black lives in North America in a dramatic political fashion that has reshaped our present political context. In this issue of TOPIA Indigenous lives and Black Lives live close up to each other on our pages.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.644
Threshold uncertainty score0.707

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0380.028
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.291
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

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTOPIA Canadian Journal of Cultural StudiesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207