MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2887995173 · doi:10.33137/pbsc.v44i2.18478

Design and Ideology in <i>A Pocketful of Canada</i>

2006· article· en· W2887995173 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Carole Gerson

Bibliographic record

VenuePapers of The Bibliographical Society of Canada · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCrafts, Textile, and Design
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian Government
KeywordsIdeologyPolitical scienceLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada 44/2 of the best Canadian writing." Rather, the principle of selection was to choose material that was "characteristically Canadian, in mood, or content, or both." Dedicated to "the man on the street and the woman in the streetcar,"' PocketfulIconstructs a deliberately appealing vision of Canada during the period of post-war reconstruction. Despite Robins's caveat, the Council's own later publicity would describe the volume as "An anthology of Canadian poetry, prose and art, selected in a successful attempt to capture the spirit of Canada and its people."b The story of this book's production, dissemination, and reception, together with an analysis of its contents, provides a fascinating window into a crucial period in Canada's cultural history, when post-war ideologies would lead to far-reaching consequences through the eventual impact of the Massey Commission. A non-governmental organization, the Canadian Council of Education for Citizenship was founded in 194I and became the Canadian Citizenship Council in 1946, shortly before the Canadian Citizenship Act came into force on I January 1947.7 During the War, the Council issued various pamphlets, such as Suggested Program for Remembrance Day in the Schools of Canada (194I) and International

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.837

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0230.025
Scholarly communication0.0190.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.166 · 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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePapers of The Bibliographical Society of CanadaSame topicCrafts, Textile, and DesignFrench-language works237,207