MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389389545 · doi:10.1177/00084298231209700

Reviving the violet flame: The new age conspiratorial journey of Canada’s Queen Romana Didulo

2023· article· en· W4389389545 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Carmen Celestini, Amarnath Amarasingam

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedia, Religion, Digital Communication
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQueen (butterfly)MysticismSilenceMovement (music)SAINTArtReligious studiesArt historyChristianityHistoryTheologyAncient historyPhilosophyLiteratureAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Romano Didulo, the self-proclaimed Queen of Canada, gained notoriety as an influencer online within the QAnon conspiracy movement. Taking advantage of both the pandemic and the silence of Q (the anonymous online persona behind what became the QAnon movement), Didulo has created a movement of her own. Didulo relies on a religious movement from the theosophical traditions of the 1930s and 1940s: the I AM movement, which was started by Guy Ballard and his wife Edna Anne Wheeler Ballard after Guy Ballard had a mystical encounter with Saint Germain on Mount Shasta in California. The movement’s title comes from God’s words to Moses in Exodus 3:14 – ‘I am who I am’ – and encompasses Christian dogma, occultism, eastern religions and New Age mysticism. While there is much to examine about Queen Didulo – her conspiracism, her anti-government agitation, and so on – the authors argue here that there is something at the core of all of this that has yet to be fully articulated: Didulo’s religious pedigree.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.402

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0550.023
Scholarly communication0.0150.004
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.212 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in Religion/Sciences ReligieusesSame topicMedia, Religion, Digital CommunicationFrench-language works237,207