MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403118925 · doi:10.3138/chr-2023-0036

Heritage, Parks Canada, and the Narrowing of Western Canadian History

2024· article· en· W4403118925 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
R. H. A. Coutts

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Historical Review · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmerican Environmental and Regional History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistoryArchaeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For decades, national historic sites have played a major role in helping shape the historical narrative in western Canada and throughout the country. In this Forum article I examine how heritage is defined and assess the way the early commemoration of historic sites in the west, including fur trade posts and battle sites associated with the North-West Resistance of 1885, set a conventional direction for what was important in western Canadian history and, just as significantly, what was not. I investigate the changing and at one time progressive role of historical research in Parks Canada, the agency responsible for managing these sites. I consider the later attempts by the agency to refute this innovative research in favour of a return to original, authorized, and archetypal colonialist messages, at the same time narrowing the scope of historical interpretation. Although very recent initiatives have attempted to broaden historic site interpretation in the West, Parks Canada is still faced with attempting to use commemorated and celebrated colonial spaces to communicate post-colonial messages.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.526

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.011
Science and technology studies0.0080.008
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.170 · 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
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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Historical ReviewSame topicAmerican Environmental and Regional HistoryFrench-language works237,207