MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Reasserting the Canon of Black Canadian Literature: A Review of Winfried Siemerling’s The Black Atlantic Reconsidered

2019· review· en· W2946228385 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sara Casco-Solís, Ana María Fraile Marcos

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicShort Stories in Global Literature
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCanonHistoryLiteratureArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Winfried Siemerling's latest book, The Black Atlantic Reconsidered: Black Canadian Writing, Cultural History and the Presence of the Past (2015), offers a thorough re-examination of Black Canadian writing and cultural studies, relatively new fields of study if compared with the well-established traditions of the African American canon and postcolonial literatures from Africa and the Caribbean.1 Siemerling's well researched and elegantly written book contributes to reverse the critical neglect of this body of literature both in diasporic studies -such as Paul Gilroy's influential The Black Atlantic (1993)-and in Canada, until the groundbreaking research of scholars such as George Elliott Clarke. 2 Engaging with the historical dimensions of Black Canada from its beginnings to the present, Siemerling's book thus follows previous endeavors to resituate the study of Black Canada, and presents a global (re)consideration of African Canadian polyphony.It focuses on the work of as diverse authors as Marie-Célie Agnant, André Alexis, Dionne Brand, David Chariandy, Austin C. Clarke, George Elliott Clarke, Wayde Comp-

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.404
Threshold uncertainty score0.813

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0170.028
Science and technology studies0.0060.014
Scholarly communication0.0130.010
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0060.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.241 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueRevista Canaria de Estudios InglesesSame topicShort Stories in Global LiteratureFrench-language works237,207