MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4399178672 · doi:10.4324/9781003096016-34

Examinations at the founding of the University of Toronto

2024· book-chapter· en· W4399178672 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alison Cleverley

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHistoryOptometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The arrival of Classics as an institutionalised program in Upper Canada (now Ontario) was part of a reshaping of the land and of the Canadian citizen subject. It was in the nineteenth century, and Canada was becoming its own country, setting up new permanent institutions like universities and national and provincial parks. There are two aspects of these related formations that have captured my attention and which I will spend a little time on in this chapter. The first is the system of examinations in Classics as it arrived and adapted with the institution of Upper Canada’s first university. And the second is the creation of wilderness—(idea of) a space of wild land that needs to be protected from human involvement and which is, therefore, very far away, completely separable, and separate from Classics at the University of Toronto and its examinations. Focusing on the relationship between university examinations, Classics, and lawns as they intersected at the University of Toronto in its earlier years, I ask how the methods used to know ancient history at the University of Toronto taught a way of seeing the world that enforced boundaries between Classics and lawns.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.902
Threshold uncertainty score0.710

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.003

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCanadian Identity and History→French-language works237,207→