MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3083992953 · doi:10.4000/communication.12343

Constance DILLEY (2018), Crosscurrents. How Film Policy Developed in Quebec 1960-1983

2020· article· en· W3083992953 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Yasmine Belam

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunication · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFrench Historical and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMovie theaterHumanitiesArtArt historyEthnologyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ce livre de Constance Dilley est surprenant. En effet, ce qui nous est servi est très loin d’un exposé froid et objectif de la mise sur pied des politiques sur le cinéma au Québec. On se rapproche plutôt d’un récit d’aventures traversant l’histoire complexe du Québec des années 1960 à 1980. Le livre pourrait s’adresser à un large public, mais aussi à des étudiants et étudiantes, qui y trouveraient un ouvrage de référence sur l’histoire de la législation qui encadre le cinéma québécois. Dilley...

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.940
Threshold uncertainty score0.432

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0160.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.002

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.167 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunicationSame topicFrench Historical and Cultural StudiesFrench-language works237,207