Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review essay highlights some of the major changes introduced to the revamped Canadian History Hall at the Canadian Museum of History. It considers some of the efforts made to “Indigenize” the Hall through various museological and design elements, as well as the sustained narrative attention given to Indigenous histories, cultures, and personalities throughout all three of the galleries. The essay also identifies the visible impact made by the expanded role for historian-curators, especially a sensitivity to change over time, personality-centred storytelling, and a self-awareness of the subjectivity of all historical interpretation that was somewhat muted in the earlier iterations of the Hall. While all of this is encouraging, trying to show-and-tell too much plagues all three galleries, and in doing so the impact of the narrative is undercut. Finally, the essay suggests that the Hall ought to share more interpretive space with the wide range of source communities whose stories and material culture are on display. Acting as a facilitator and devoting resources to this end could move the Canadian History Hall closer to the ever-elusive goal of decolonizing public history and settler heritage institutions. Not only would this enrich the museum as a whole, but it could also serve as a model for other public history sites.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.021 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".