Preface and Acknowledgements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
H IS COLLECTION OF ES SAYS focuses on Canadian historyand its legacies as represented in novels and films in English and French, produced in Canada mainly in the 1980s and 1990S.It is a collaborative effort by three members of the Schools of English and Modem Languages at the University of Reading, with contributions from two colleagues who are experts on anglophone films -one from Glasgow Caledonian University and one from Brock University, Ontario.Our approach is both cross-cultural and interdisciplinary, aiming at articulating Canadian differences through a comparison of anglophone and francophone cultures, illustrated by the literary and filmic treatment of some of the different groups which make up Canadian society -English-Canadian, Quebecois, Acadian, Native, and ethnic minorities.The emphasis in these essays is on the problematic representation of Canadianness, which, we argue, is closely bound up with different constructions of history and its legacies.While the essays are in English, we believe that the English/French language difference is emblematic of Canadian difference.Equal attention is paid to literary texts and films in both languages.The two-part arrangement of this book, with one section on Literature and the other on Film, sets up the pattern of relationships between the two forms of cultural representation that these essays explore.Essays in the Literature section are on single texts, grouped so as to permit dialogue between the essays; the Film section with its mirror structure both supplements and amplifies this dialogue, extending notions of Canadianness with its emphasis on voices from Quebec and Acadia traditionally ,othered' in Canadian history.The editor and the contributors would like to thank all those who have assisted them in their research for this book.In particular, they would like to mention the unfailing support and kindness shown to Coral
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 | 0.003 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.200 | 0.097 |
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".