MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204715733 · doi:10.37415/studia/2016/55/4058

Egy kultúra, két kultúra, sok kultúra

2016· article· en· W3204715733 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gabriella T. Espák

Bibliographic record

VenueStudia Litteraria · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticulturalismNationalismConstitutionEgalitarianismReferendumVisionPolitical scienceCitizenshipPoliticsLiberalismIdentity (music)PopulationLawReligious studiesGender studiesPolitical economyEthnologySociologyAnthropologyDemographyArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On the occasion of the 150th anniversary of the Canadian Confederation, this paper surveys the various visions of society Canada has lived through until recently. Monocultural, bicultural, multicultural models of political identity alternated to clash over the constitution, thereby making it impossible for Aboriginal peoples and Québécois to deliver nationalist arguments through the wall of liberal egalitarianism. The failure of the Meech Lake Accord pushed the country towards a federal and identity crisis inasmuch as it failed to reconcile the interests of national minorities with the interest of the nation as a whole within one legal framework. Continuing clashes over the constitution in the Canada-round at Charlottetown 1991-92, culminating in a failed referendum on the proposed constitutional amendment known as the Charlottetown Accord, show that inherent cleavages in the body politic have survived, so multiculturalism has only been a partial solution to a population management problem.

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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.312
Threshold uncertainty score0.628

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0120.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0940.027

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.231 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudia LitterariaSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207