MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2795969873 · doi:10.22215/etd/2016-11254

The Women's Canadian Historical Society of Ottawa: Constructing Public Memory and Preserving History in a Changing City, 1898-1932

2016· dissertation· en· W2795969873 on OpenAlexaffabout
Connie Gunn

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExhibitionNationalismGovernment (linguistics)Ethnic groupCapital (architecture)HistoryEmpireCollective memoryFellHistorical memoryPublic historyGender studiesMedia studiesSociologyGenealogyPolitical scienceLawEconomic historyArt historyArtGeographyAncient historyPoliticsHumanitiesCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis examines the membership and work of the Women's Canadian Historical Society of Ottawa from 1898 to 1932.Through commemorations, historical tableaux, exhibitions of artefacts, and the publication, Transactions, they participated in the construction of a nationalist and imperialist collective memory, celebrating connections to the British Empire, a mythologized settler past, and Ottawa's evolution from lumber town to national capital.Analysis of the origins, class and ethnicity of the Society shows that French-Canadian participation fell and membership broadened as Ottawa became a government town.The thesis describes competition from the male-dominated Bytown Pioneer Association in 1923 over the commemoration of Colonel By, and it posits that the masculinization of the historical profession led the Society to abandon written accounts in Transactions, and focus upon the collection and display of artefacts in the Bytown Museum.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.201
Threshold uncertainty score0.926

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0390.014
Scholarly communication0.0090.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.208 · 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
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCanadian Identity and History→French-language works237,207→