MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4415842081 · doi:10.47616/jamrsss.v6i4.656

Examining the struggle for a more inclusive identity and the early advocacy of multiculturalism in Canada

2025· article· W4415842081 on OpenAlexaffabout
Shinder Purewal

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Asian Multicultural Research for Social Sciences Study · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsKwantlen Polytechnic University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticulturalismIndigenousIdentity (music)Government (linguistics)Ethnic groupDiversity (politics)Inclusion (mineral)National identity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper focuses on the struggle for equal recognition within Canadian identity by non-charter citizens. These groups, by rejecting the idea of Canada as solely bilingual and bicultural, successfully challenged government efforts to replace Anglo-conformity with a bicultural model. As a compromise, Canada adopted the notion of "multiculturalism within a bilingual framework.” This approach helped promote a more inclusive national identity and contributed to the creation of a peaceful, tolerant, and unified society. For many ethnic communities, particularly visible minorities, it marked progress in removing barriers to full integration. The inclusive environment also supported advances in LGBTQ and Indigenous rights, including acknowledgment of the historical injustices faced by First Nations peoples. As a result, Canada has adopted an innovative approach to inclusivity by creating a new national identity that embraces both diversity and bilingualism.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.255
Threshold uncertainty score0.864

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0440.013
Scholarly communication0.0100.003
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.329 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Asian Multicultural Research for Social Sciences Study→Same topicCanadian Identity and History→French-language works237,207→