MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313038332 · doi:10.2307/41879238

They’re Both the Same Thing? Transnational Politics and Identity Performance in 1960s Toronto

2011· article· en· W4313038332 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Stuart Henderson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal for the Study of Radicalism · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical radicalismIconCitationPoliticsIdentity (music)State (computer science)Media studiesLibrary scienceHistorySociologyPolitical scienceComputer scienceArtLawAestheticsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research Article| July 01 2011 They’re Both the Same Thing? Transnational Politics and Identity Performance in 1960s Toronto Stuart Henderson Stuart Henderson Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Journal for the Study of Radicalism (2011) 5 (2): 35–63. https://doi.org/10.2307/41879238 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Permissions Search Site Citation Stuart Henderson; They’re Both the Same Thing? Transnational Politics and Identity Performance in 1960s Toronto. Journal for the Study of Radicalism 1 July 2011; 5 (2): 35–63. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/41879238 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All Scholarly Publishing CollectiveMichigan State University PressJournal for the Study of Radicalism Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. © 2011 Michigan State University Board of Trustees2011 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.120
Threshold uncertainty score0.871

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0150.011
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.294
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal for the Study of RadicalismSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207