MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4251813327 · doi:10.3138/chr.92.3.481

Expedition Yukon 1967: Centennial and the Politics of Mountaineering in Kluane

2011· article· en· W4251813327 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
PearlAnn Reichwein

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Historical Review · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCentennialMountaineeringGeographyNationalismClubArchaeologyPoliticsCultural landscapeMountain range (options)National parkEthnologyAdventureHistoryPolitical scienceArt historyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: The Yukon Alpine Centennial Expedition was a mass outdoor adventure to celebrate Canada's Centennial in 1967. Organized by the Alpine Club of Canada, it mobilized unifying narratives of federal nationhood through athletic exploits and sporting bodies. Funded by federal, provincial, and territorial governments, three prongs of this major expedition involved more than three hundred mountaineers and resulted in thirty-three climbs in the St Elias Range, including twenty-seven first ascents. The expedition named many geographic features and left imprints on the cultural landscape. Although the expedition officially commemorated nationhood, climbers nonetheless challenged common assumptions through their ways of knowing mountain landscapes. Looking back to the 1925 first ascent of Mt Logan and forward to the declaration of Kluane National Park in 1972, yace represented Canadian federalist nationalism in northern mountain landscapes, situated amid the Southern Tutchone homelands. Imagining peaks in the St Elias Range as the domain of Canada's national alpine club contributed to imagining Canada's northern national parks established in the 1970s. This study considers how encounters and stories associated with the expedition might be read to place the study of commemoration and mountaineering history within discussions of local knowledge, cultural landscapes, and environmental philosophy.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.801
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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