MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2993677687

National and Global: Twenty-Five Years of Film Studies in a Canadian Context

2016· article· en· W2993677687 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marc Furstenau

Bibliographic record

VenueProject Muse (Johns Hopkins University) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSport and Mega-Event Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublishingContext (archaeology)Library scienceObligationMedia studiesReading (process)SociologyHistoryPublic relationsPolitical scienceLawComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTIONWith this issue and the next, the Canadian Journal of Film Studies/Revue canadienne d'etudes cinematographiques marks its twenty-fifth year of continuous publication. This has been a collective accomplishment, one achieved by those many individuals who have, for all those years, edited the journal, served on the Editorial Board, managed its finances, submitted the SSHRC publishing grant application, worked as assistants, solicited book reviews, stuffed envelopes and licked stamps, answered letters (and later, emails), designed the covers, made the proofs, maintained the website, and done the many other various tasks that have kept this enterprise going. Most importantly, for twenty-five years, authors have been submitting their articles and reviewers have been reading and evaluating them. That kind of evaluation fulfills what is perhaps the most fundamental scholarly obligation we have, which is review the work of our peers. By doing that, we make possible what is ultimately a collective endeavour: the publication and dissemination of our research and our ideas.Scholarly journals play an indispensible role in the development of disciplines, and over the past twenty-five years the CJFS/RCEC has been a major venue for the work of film scholars in Canada, and from around the world, a site of intellectual and scholarly activity that has played no small part in the growth of film studies in this country. When the journal began publishing two and a half decades ago, there were a few Film Studies departments in Canada offering undergraduate courses, and even some MA programmes. In the intervening years, though, the number of programmes has grown markedly, so that Film Studies is offered at both the undergraduate and graduate level in almost every university in the country, with several new PhD programmes created in the last few years.The CJFS/RCEC is published by the Film Studies Association of Canada/ Association canadienne detudes cinematographiques. Mandated in the FSAC/ ACEC constitution, the publication of a journal was be a major part of the associations effort to foster and advance the study of the history and art of film and related fields. The success of the CJFS/RCEC is revealed most significantly, I think, in the role that it has played-whether directly or indirectly- in the achievement of such a goal, in the flourishing of film and media studies in Canada. From the very beginning, moreover, the journal was bilingual, publishing work in both English and French. The first French articles appeared in 1995, and scholarship in French has since then been regularly published in the journal.While the association was founded in 1977, it was only in 1991 that the journal began publishing. Zuzana Pick was an original member from 1988 of the FSAC/ACEC editorial board, and editor of the CJFS/RCEC from 1993 1997. In her reminiscences from that time, included as part of this twentyfifth anniversary issue, she describes the efforts that she and others-especially Peter Morris, Peter Harcourt, Michael Dorland, Bart Testa, and Peter Rist- made get the journal underway, and notes the and of those early years that ensured its initial success. It is just such teamwork and collegiality that has kept the journal going, providing such an important national venue for Canadian film scholarship. Since the journal was founded, there have been seven editors, and a large number of volunteers who have served on the Editorial Board. Peter Morris was the founding editor, from 1991-1993, followed by Zuzana Pick, from 1993-1996, who consolidated the journal's early success, and then William Wees, from 1996-2008. In 2000, the new position of Managing Editor was created, with Angela Stukator first serving, and then Blaine Allan as both Chair and Managing Editor, from 2002 2009, providing invaluable editorial guidance. Under the direction of Wees and Allan, the journal's reach was significantly expanded, and the journal was re-designed. …

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.188
Threshold uncertainty score0.941

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0070.018
Science and technology studies0.0430.018
Scholarly communication0.0250.008
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProject Muse (Johns Hopkins University)Same topicSport and Mega-Event ImpactsFrench-language works237,207