MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790265151 · doi:10.15353/cfs-rcea.v5i1.227

Voir le jour: Breastfeeding and the commons

2018· article· en· W2790265151 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Natalie Doonan

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Food Studies / La Revue canadienne des études sur l alimentation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreastfeedingNarrativeSociologyPublic spaceGender studiesStorytellingAestheticsArtMedicineLiteratureEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Watch Voir le jour from Natalie Doonan on Vimeo This research-creation project focuses on breastfeeding in public as an act of claiming space for the common good. Its audio-visual component, “Voir le jour,” is part of a larger work that includes community screenings and locative storytelling. “Voir le jour” consists of recordings of nursing mothers, breastfeeding experts, and activists sharing their stories about the joys and challenges of breastfeeding outside the home. These stories are accompanied by a slideshow of photographs depicting moms nursing in public spaces. “Voir le jour” renders the labour of mothering audible and visible in public spaces, including online. It was created in part for use by the breastfeeding support organization Nourri-Source Montréal. “Voir le jour” contests the notion that “public” and “private” are distinct spatial categories. The fact that breastfeeding is commonly relegated to the sphere of domestic activity is a testament to the tenacious grip of patriarchy in everyday life, and leads to isolation for many new mothers. The discomfort that may be felt in response to seeing intimate experiences between mothers and babies is part of transforming the myth that private and public activities and spaces are discrete and separate spheres.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.190
Threshold uncertainty score0.377

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.003

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Food Studies / La Revue canadienne des études sur l alimentationSame topicBreastfeeding Practices and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207