MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4404461455 · doi:10.4324/9781003521433-7

At the Site of Wilderness

2024· book-chapter· en· W4404461455 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bridget Cauthery

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmerican Environmental and Regional History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWildernessEnvironmental scienceGeographyEnvironmental planningEnvironmental resource managementEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this chapter, Meredith Monk&s;s 1990 work Facing North is analysed in light of ideas of presence, absence, and dis-location where wilderness is a place in which to become “be-wildered”. Facing North was conceived while Monk was in residency at The Banff Centre in Banff, Alberta, working on her opera, Atlas . Like a diary, the work evolved from improvisations in the studio in Banff, where Monk was surrounded by soaring mountains, glacial fields, icy gales, and chest-deep snow. Considering relevant secondary source material regarding Monk&s;s work, including interviews, a viewing guide for the piece designed for elementary students, as well as CD liner notes for the recording, this chapter explores the extent to which Facing North underscores and extends shared cultural understandings of wilderness and the performance of geographical and personal isolation. Where Indigenous peoples speak of reverence for and harmony with the land and see their role as caretakers, settlers, by contrast, see land, climate, and natural formations as worthy yet formidable opponents. Monk&s;s multi-vocal duet addresses the impassable, perilous, “no man&s;s land” illusion of wilderness and considers how to be at peace with being a figure in the landscape.

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)0.000
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.140

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.004

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.174
Teacher spread0.167 · 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 topicAmerican Environmental and Regional History→French-language works237,207→