Bibliographic record
Abstract
In June 1999, at the Congress of the Humanities and Social Sciences held at Bishop’s University in Quebec, we attended the first-ever conference devoted exclusively to African American Rhetoric.1 As members of a relatively small Canadian contingent, we were aware not only of our numerical under-representation but of the irony that the first conference of this kind was being held in Canada. This was not the first time that Canada has served as a place for the meeting and discussion of African American culture and concerns. Indeed, as Rinaldo Walcott has demonstrated, in 1905 the Niagara Movement, forerunner of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), convened on the Canadian side of the Niagara River, apparently because it was unable to find suitable facilities in the US. Significantly, Black Canadians and their organizations were not invited to participate. This exclusion is particularly noteworthy given that so many of Canada’s Black organizations were in fact founded by African Americans who had relocated north of the forty-ninth parallel, as well as by their descendants (Walcott 18). In both Fort Erie in 1905 and Quebec in 1999, the crossing of a border inaugurated a debate. The conference at Bishop’s happened appropriately at a time when there is an increased interest in the possibilities and challenges of rethinking borders and their meanings. These interests are linked to the current political and economic climate, which is characterized by increased transnational migration, heightened cultural interaction, and the emergence of an electronic culture that subverts existing borders. The result of these phenomena is the emergence of new and challenging ways of conceiving of identity (no longer simply national, cultural, racial, sexual) and the emergence of new approaches to academic disciplines and paradigms of knowledge. The aim of this special issue of the Canadian Review of American Studies is to explore the unique perspective that African American and Black Canadian border crossing can bring to these topics.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.494 | 0.296 |
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".