NATIONAL IDENTITY, TRANSNATIONAL LITERATURE: A REVIEW ON CANADA’S FICTION AND ITS MULTIFACETED GLOBALISATION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Both Brazil and Canada exist in-between the status of colony and coloniser, tradition and modernity, past and future; belonging to the New World, there is a lot one might learn from the other. These countries are spaces that literature might rethink ontologies – precisely in terms of identity. Literature reflects one’s society, examining and projecting manners for changing or asserting its epistemes. The national myth is nothing but a myth, and, as such, its reality gaps can only be filled in by other illusory meanings. Myths can destroy us; but they can also help us resurrect as nations. Within this brief study, I decide to accept such challenge, and to depart from the identity condition of Brazil to concoct a sketch of what might have been going on in Canadian fiction during the process of globalisation. The palpability of national identities, their relevance and vitality, shall be tested, for if I say “I am not a Canadian, I’m Brazilian” I need to know what I am talking about. Do I?
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".