MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6907305263 · doi:10.18910/56243

ネオリベラル多文化主義とカナダの謝罪の時代

2016· article· ja· W6907305263 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageja
FieldEngineering
TopicMilitary Technology and Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess (computing)Identification (biology)Product (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Political scientists have recently noted that we live in an "age of apologies", in which certain governments apologize for certain kinds of historical wrongs.This has been markedly true in Canada, with at least 10 major apologies since the late 1980s.The first of these, and one to which I give particular attention in the paper, is the apology to Japanese Canadians, for their internment during World War II, but there have also been apologies for the legacy of residential schools in Indigenous communities, for the forced relocation of Inuit to the High Arctic, for the head tax leveled on Chinese immigrants to Canada, for the razing of Africville, a predominantly Black neighborhood in Nova Scotia, and more.While these apologies are often considered separately, and in political terms, as movements towards national inclusion (for racialized or ethnic groups) or national sovereignty (for indigenous ones)), in this paper I argue that it is important to consider them together.To do so helps illuminate some of the political economic dynamics shaping the rise in apologies and why and how this rise in apologies is co-extensive with significant neoliberal transformations in the Canadian state, and of Canadian ways of understanding diversity.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.903
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.227
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB)Same topicMilitary Technology and StrategiesFrench-language works237,207