MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3044642616 · doi:10.1558/jasr.39524

Double Diversity

2020· article· en· W3044642616 on OpenAlexaffabout
Catherine Caufield

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal for the Academic Study of Religion · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsConcordia University of Edmonton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticulturalismSociologyJudaismMindsetPoliticsDiversity (politics)Gender studiesIdentity (music)ImmigrationAestheticsHistoryPolitical sciencePedagogyAnthropologyLawEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article is based on Our Canada: Jewish-Canadian Women Writers, a federally funded research project exploring the literary output of more than one hundred women authors in this country, together with the body of commentary on their work. Elucidating themes of immigration, tradition, identity, family, hope, and strengthening connections, the prose and poetry of these authors prods us to think about what Canada means and what these authors have contributed to our shared cultural imaginary. This literature serves to deepen our understanding of broadly diverse nations-both Jewish and Canadian. It is timely in terms of current reflection, examination and questioning of the multicultural paradigm that has shaped Canadian identity for over thirty years. Nothing is more challenging than grasping, or attempting to grasp, the mindset of others with radically different understandings and beliefs. Part of this challenge are the social and political implications of how particular individuals within particular communities have understood themselves and their place in the Canadian mosaic-often over generations. The contributions of Jewish women writers to Canadian literature respond to this challenge, beginning in the late nineteenth century in Montréal, developing in key centres across the country, and continuing in the twenty-first century.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.200
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.250 · 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.

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
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal for the Academic Study of ReligionSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207