Bibliographic record
Abstract
I feel sometimes, when I'm at McGill, like you're there, and to come out of McGill takes a huge amount of effort.Especially once you've climbed up that bloody hill.If you're going down, you're not coming back up.So if you're up that hill, you're going to stay there a good long time.You're not coming back up if you go down.And once you're up that hill, there's nothing around you that's not McGill.When you're on that campus, it's all, y'know, everything.You can't buy food if it wasn't approved by McGill, you can't wipe your ass without it being McGill toilet paper, you can't step off and step back on.It's like a hard commitment to, like, be on or off.I feel like you drink the Kool-Aid or you don't.You really can't have a foot in both worlds.In describing her perception as a Black student at the time of our interview, RC, 1 quoted above, recalls the historic significance of the hill upon which the McGill University campus is located.Conjuring a history of which RC was not aware at the time, the comments imply layers of meaning -particularly around social class -embedded in and still communicated by the location of the downtown campus in the area known as the Golden Square Mile.They recall how working-class and Black people "belonged" below the hill, offering a salient metaphor for the experiences of someone who has, however precariously, "made it up the hill," so to speak.Up the hill on the university campus can feel like "a place apart, a somewhat rarefied space" distinct from and yet part of the area that surrounds it.2 Indeed, from the mid-nineteenth to mid-twentieth centuries Montreal was considered to be like "two cities": one "above the hill," on the slope of the mountain, and the other "below the hill." 3 McGill University, located above the hill on the former estate of colonial merchant and slave owner James McGill, served as a key landmark in the development 1 Introduction: The University as a Site of Struggle
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.067 | 0.013 |
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".