MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6983657453

Nature's Past Episode 030: Environmental Histories of Montreal

2012· other· en· W6983657453 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueYork University Digital Library (York University) · 2012
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental historyMetropolitan areaUrban historyMountQuarter (Canadian coin)Section (typography)Miami
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Last year, the University of Pittsburgh Press published its first book on Canadian urban environmental history titled Metropolitan Natures: Environmental Histories of Montreal. This diverse collection of essays was edited by two leading scholars of Quebec environmental history, Stephane Castonguay and Michele Dagenais. This episode of the podcast explores some of the environmental histories of Montreal. \n \nMontreal is one of the oldest metropolises in North America with a history of Euro-American resettlement and urban development that spans more than four centuries. Prior to European colonization, the island of Montreal was home to the fortified Iroquoian village of Hochelaga. Needless to say, organizing a series of case studies of the environmental history of Montreal is no easy task. Castonguay and Dagenais decided to organize the collection along three broad themes: representations, infrastructures, and hinterlands. The essays in the first section, representations, focus on changing human perceptions of Montreal and its region beginning with the earliest observations of the Island of Montreal and Mount Royal by Jacques Cartier in the 1530s. The following section on “Infrastructures” examines socio-technical systems in the urban environment with particular focus on water systems and roadway infrastructure. In the concluding section of the book on “Hinterlands” the authors explored the changing relationship between city and countryside as Montreal developed as Canada’s leading metropolis. \n \nOn this episode of the podcast, I spoke with two of the authors from this edited collection, Darcy Ingram and Daniel Rueck. \n \nPlease be sure to take a moment to fill out a short listener survey here.

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)0.001
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 score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.428

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0150.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.136
Teacher spread0.132 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueYork University Digital Library (York University)→French-language works237,207→