MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3138551660

Multicultural Canada and Diasporic Writers: Rohinton Mistry and Shyam Selvadurai

2019· article· en· W3138551660 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
C. V. Padmaja, Saurav Raj

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticulturalismSri lankaRace (biology)Diversity (politics)Ethnic groupGender studiesCultural diversitySociologyDiasporaPolitical scienceSouth asiaLawEthnology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada, a global community home for many people of different races and cultures, embraces all cultures—cultural diversity being one of the country’s most important national characteristics. All ethnocultural groups have official sanction to identify themselves with the culture of their choice and yet retain access to social and economic equality. Irrespective of race or ethnicity, the individuals in a multicultural society are entitled to equal treatment, protection from racial discrimination, equality of opportunity, and the right to remain culturally different. This proved an advantage to a diasporic writer operating within Canadian multiculturalism. The right to retain one’s culture has made many of the diasporic writers go back to their mother country in the choice of themes. The paper discusses how Rohinton Mistry and Shyam Selvadurai, the two South Asian diasporic writers of Indian and Sri Lankan origin, too have gone back to India and Sri Lanka respectively in fictionalizing their lived experiences set in their countries of origin.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.181
Threshold uncertainty score0.363

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0390.013
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.182 · 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
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic Journal→Same topicCanadian Identity and History→French-language works237,207→