MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4248431827 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14647005

The benefit's place in cultural-political imaginings

2021· preprint· en· W4248431827 on OpenAlexaff
MaryAnn Martin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPhilippine History and Culture
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTributePoliticsNarrativeRelation (database)MythologySociologyHistoryGender studiesAestheticsPolitical scienceArtLawArt historyLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The proliferation of large-scale benefits over the last thirty years has led to debate about the place of the benefit in cultural and political spheres. Acknowledging that cross-cultural flow takes a number of forms, that politics and culture increasingly intermingle, and that the West has a long history and geography tied to exploitation and occupation of other countries, this project discusses four benefits in relation to ideas about myth, narrative, celebrity, and memory. Such benefits as the Concerts for Bangladesh, the Sun City project, Freedomfest (The Nelson Mandela Seventieth Birthday Tribute), and America: A Tribute To Heroes, are explored in relation to cultural-political movements and Western imaginings of Bangladesh, South Africa, and Afghanistan. In so doing, the positional superiority of the West is necessarily reconsidered. Benefits are directional pointers through which music narrates storied sociality, mapping the beats of particular histories and geographies. Emphasizing the importance of hearing, and thereby challenging the visual focus of Western culture, readers are encouraged to hear the maps that benefits project through the traces they inevitably leave in popular landscapes.

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)0.003
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.028
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0000.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPhilippine History and CultureFrench-language works237,207