MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4248498392 · doi:10.3138/chr.1349

“If two ride a horse, one must ride in front”: Married Women's Nationality and the Law in Canada 1880–1950

2013· article· en· W4248498392 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Philip Girard

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Historical Review · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCitizenshipNationalityNaturalizationLawDominionEmancipationGender studiesPolitical scienceAutonomyPrivilege (computing)SociologyImmigrationPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Canada's Naturalization Act 1881 followed Britain's lead in requiring a woman's nationality to conform to that of her husband. Analysis of the interwar campaign to change the law sheds light on the link between the status of women and dominion autonomy; the continuing reluctance to admit immigrant women to the full privileges of citizenship; the role of national women's organizations in maintaining Canada's future as a white settler nation; and the emergence of new ways of justifying and maintaining male legal privilege at a time when ideas about gender and marital equality were gaining some traction. By 1946, when Canada's Citizenship Act declared citizenship to be independent of marriage, and Canadian citizenship to be independent of British subject status, the emancipation of married women from their husbands' nationality tracked the disengagement of Canada from the British Empire.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.103
Threshold uncertainty score0.746

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.010
Science and technology studies0.0080.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Historical ReviewSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207