Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canadian Jewish integration was a social process that took place in the political sphere, but was also driven by everyday practices such as preparing and consuming food. Despite this, Jewish food history and the history of Canadian Jewish integration have been mostly investigated separately. This essay ties in with the work of Franca Iacovetta et al. and Donna Gabbaccia, who examined ethnic identity politics and food history in Canada and the USA as interrelated fields. To add to this research, this paper examines a Jewish community cookbook as a moment of Jewish-Canadian integration. By analyzing the Naomi Cook Book, published from 1928 to 1960 by Hadassah-WIZO in Toronto, this paper offers the alternative of exploring integration history as a history of everyday life. It argues that the cookbook is more than a recipe collection. By presenting specific ingredients, menus, and advertisements, it is promoting a narrative of Anglophone Canadian Jewish integration to a larger sociocultural frame of North American consumer culture. In doing so, it presents the history of Jewish-Canadian integration not as a linear sequence of steps on a ladder leading to completion, but as a process with both new and recurrent challenges, contradictions, and contestations.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.043 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".