Hyphens, Hybridities and Mixed-Race Identities: Gendered Readings in Contemporary Canadian Women's Texts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF CANADIAN WRITERS work in the gap between the idealist official discourse of multicultural ism and the day-to-day realities of a sometimes grudgingly multicultural society. Strictly speaking, all Canadians inhabit that space, consciously or unconsciously, from the documented moment in which the nation decided to define itself as multicultural and the more indefinite moment in which the country became a diversified social group. Writers of all ethnic backgrounds are interpellated by this fact, and many address it in their writing. Women, on the other hand, inhabit the gap and the tension between a multicultural discourse and the discourse of gender, and the tempo marked by the realities of both. White writers have been forced to revise their positions, while racialized writers have entered the world of Canadian literature with politically and poetically charged texts, a resistant and transformative language born of that site which is variously defined by the hyphen, the gap or the centrifugal force of mixed-race voice.(...).
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.034 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".