MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406625411 · doi:10.29173/cons29536

Beyond the Trenches

2025· article· en· W4406625411 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueConstellations · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While World War I presented opportunities for women to break out of traditional roles, it also reinforced enduring gender norms. The war represents a complex period of both progress and regression for women’s rights and roles. This essay explores the impact of World War I on Canadian women, highlighting the tensions between the temporary expansion of their roles and the reinforcement of traditional gender dynamics. Prior to the war, women’s roles were largely confined to the domestic sphere, with limited participation in public or economic activities. However, as men left to fight, women took on jobs traditionally reserved for men, especially in clerical and industrial work, demonstrating their capabilities in new areas. Despite this, women’s contributions were often framed within the confines of traditional femininity, particularly in nursing, which reinforced the image of women as nurturers and caregivers. Propaganda during the war emphasized women’s caregiving roles, portraying them as saintly figures whose work in nursing aligned with societal ideals of female virtue and sacrifice. This reinforced the maternalistic view of women, even as they gained greater visibility in the workforce.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.804
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.247 · 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