MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2993593800 · doi:10.3138/jcs.2018-0021

The 2010 Vancouver Olympics and Canada’s War in Afghanistan: The Intersection of Sporting Spectacle and the Politics of Precariousness

2019· article· en· W2993593800 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Lisa McDermott, Jay Scherer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Canadian Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGun Ownership and Violence Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpectaclePoliticsFraming (construction)AfghanPolitical scienceLawTorturePolitical economySociologyMedia studiesHistoryHuman rights

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As Canada prepared to host the 2010 Vancouver Winter Olympic Games, a sporting spectacle whose central ideological purpose historically has been the promotion of peace and international goodwill, its government continued its controversial war in Afghanistan where Canadian Armed Forces had been engaged since 2001 and whose presence there was increasingly becoming mired under allegations of complicity in the torture of Afghan detainees. Drawing on Judith Butler’s post-9/11 work on framing and the differential rendering of some (but not all) lives as both precarious and grievable, we critically examine what came to be the intersection of the 2010 Games and the government of Canada’s attempts to neutralize the detainee-transfer crisis that was set to engulf the country’s political and military leaders. Both the 2010 Winter Olympic Games and Canada’s Olympic Torch resolution would be politically manoeuvred to address this crisis as part of the government’s broader framing strategies associated with its enduring detainee crisis and war in Afghanistan.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.593
Threshold uncertainty score0.332

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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 venueJournal of Canadian StudiesSame topicGun Ownership and Violence ResearchFrench-language works237,207