MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943897525 · doi:10.26522/tg.v4i0.2115

From Paine to PlayStation

2019· article· en· W2943897525 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Andrey Mintchev

Bibliographic record

Venuethe general brock university Undergraduate journal of history · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Games and Media
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreedNarrativeHistoriographyHistoricity (philosophy)HistoryEntertainmentVideo gameAestheticsMedia studiesArt historyLiteratureVisual artsArtSociologyLawPolitical scienceComputer scienceMultimedia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Assassin’s Creed Unity, the historical narratives of Thomas Paine, Edmund Burke, Alexis de Tocqueville, François Furet, and Peter McPhee are presented in a way that capitalizes on the virtual and tangible characteristics of gaming. By isolating the historical accounts of the French Revolution, Ubisoft Entertainment has created a stimulating and cinematic experience that challenges the unwavering pedagogy of French historiography. Due to the nature of videogames, Assassin’s Creed Unity serves as a gateway to understanding the French Revolution through the immersive qualities of simulation. The game safely navigates around the historicity of the event by recreating the vibrant landscapes of Paris and filling its streets with believable characters, models, player-driven decisions, and a historically-rich narrative. To this effect, Assassin’s Creed Unity inevitably collides with the opinions of several historians in a way that passively educates its audience on the overall history of 1790's France—making the game an invaluable tool for learning about the French Revolution.

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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.012
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.003

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuethe general brock university Undergraduate journal of historySame topicDigital Games and MediaFrench-language works237,207