The Art of Public Mourning: An Introduction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
the air india bombings remain a little-known, little-remembered event in Canadian public memory. Three hundred and twenty-nine passengers were killed by one bomb that detonated on Air India Flight 182 en route to Delhi from Montreal via Toronto on June 23, 1985. Another bomb targeting a second Air India flight the same day caused the deaths of two baggage handlers at the Narita International Airport in Japan. Two years later, writers Clark Blaise and Bharati Mukherjee observed, "the failure to acknowledge the victims of the crash as Canadians remains for most of the families the enduring political grief of Air India 182." 1 Staggeringly, almost twenty-three years later, the Air India Victims' Families Association (aivfa) was still insisting that Canada "failed to incorporate this tragic event into its collective conscience and history." 2 Feeling ignored, abandoned, and even made suspect by their government and many fellow Canadians, the relatives of the dead have struggled for decades in the face of enormous loss and grief to instill a widespread awareness of the events of June 23, 1985, and to bring about something resembling justice.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".