MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3152605199 · doi:10.21810/strm.v12i1.281

The X-factors

2020· article· en· W3152605199 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Ofer Berenstein

Bibliographic record

VenueStream Interdisciplinary Journal of Communication · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Spaces through Art
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSymbol (formal)Character (mathematics)VotingPoliticsIdeal (ethics)SociologyAestheticsMedia studiesPolitical scienceLinguisticsLawArtPhilosophyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper asks to ground the scholarly knowledge about the role and reception of the X (or cross) as a visual cue for elections in Canadian political visual culture. While the character X (or the symbol of a cross as it is often referred to) is one of the most prominent visual cues used in visual voting encouragement materials in Canadian visual culture, little, if at all, is known about its reception by audiences. This paper asks to contribute to the understanding of the symbol and its reception by citizens. The paper is divided into three sections: 1) establishing the status of the character X as a symbol of elections in Canada, 2) examining ideal uses and occasional misuses of the X, 3) exploring the possibility of replacing the X with an alternative - the checkmark (✔). In conclusion, this work suggests that there is a growing need to reconsider the use of the X in Get Out the Vote posters, and it offers alternatives to it.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score0.307

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0620.004

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.326 · 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
GenreOther

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 venueStream Interdisciplinary Journal of CommunicationSame topicPublic Spaces through ArtFrench-language works237,207