MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410814942 · doi:10.1215/01636545-11609975

“I Look Nature”

2025· article· en· W4410814942 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jane Komori

Bibliographic record

VenueRadical History Review · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEcocriticism and Environmental Literature
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article brings together family history and personal memory with analysis of several Japanese Canadian rock gardens. The article argues that Japanese Canadians have related themselves to the environments of the World War II incarceration camps and the places in which they were forcibly resettled afterward through the collection and arrangement of rocks for both formal memorials and as vernacular expressive forms. The article reads the rock gardens as a diasporic articulation of nature that adapts both the aesthetic principles of Japanese rock gardens and dominant Canadian conceptions of the land and the environment. Indeed, Japanese Canadian memorial rock gardens, which connect viewers to the “nature” that played a key role in both the experience and administration of mass incarceration, contradict settler colonialist representations of the landscape and environment as ahistorical, empty, and pure. With their insistence on the Canadian status of the memorials, the gardeners reveal the Japanese Canadian community’s conflicted attachment to Canadian nationalism—a quandary that will only become more pressing as efforts to memorialize mass incarceration proliferate following the 2022 British Columbia Redress announcement.

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)0.002
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 score0.714
Threshold uncertainty score0.575

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.012
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.209 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadical History ReviewSame topicEcocriticism and Environmental LiteratureFrench-language works237,207