MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401115002 · doi:10.22329/gljuh.v8i1.8861

Black Bottom and Paradise Valley: The Intersection of Race, Class, and Memory in Twentieth Century Detroit

2024· article· en· W4401115002 on OpenAlexaff
Emma C. Grant

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œGreat Lakes journal of undergraduate history. · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLatin American and Latino Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParadiseNeighbourhood (mathematics)Race (biology)Ethnic groupGender studiesIntersectionalitySociologyMiddle classCollective memoryClass (philosophy)PopulationGeographyHistoryAnthropologyPolitical scienceDemographyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Black Bottom community of Detroit, Michigan became an ethnic hub for African American’s due to the Great Migration of the early twentieth century. This was a vibrant community composed of a heterogeneous population from various backgrounds and social classes, though faced with ongoing issues regarding sanitary and housing conditions due to entrenched racial segregation within the city. By 1936, the neighbourhood was split by middle class entrepreneurs who wished to raise the cultural prominence of the community’s entertainment district. This research analyzes the intra-class relations that caused the fracturing of two communities: Black Bottom and Paradise Valley. Moreover, this work refutes historical debates, which wish to concretely bind these entities as separate. Through an overview of Detroit’s history, the memory of the community is assessed effectively creating an intersectional analysis encompassing African American intra-class relations, culture, the fluidity of space, and collective memory.

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)0.001
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.231
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.239 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œGreat Lakes journal of undergraduate history.Same topicLatin American and Latino StudiesFrench-language works237,207