MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7005414449

Québec in North America : Hollywood Northeast ? North American Film Production in Québec

2008· report· en· W7005414449 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueÉrudit documents and data repository (Érudit Consortium, University of Montreal) · 2008
Typereport
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBlood disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNucleofectionGestational periodDiafiltrationProteogenomicsFusible alloyHyporeflexiaTSG101
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A low Canadian dollar and competitive tax credits have created a prosperous but volatile film industry in Québec. Film and television production in Québec generated 32,990 direct and indirect full-time equivalent jobs in 2003/2004. This note describes the workflows of the North American film industry in Québec. It examines Technicolor Creative Services, a multinational film processing and distribution company with operations in Québec, and Muse Entertainment Enterprises, a production services company based in Québec. Muse, Technicolor and their customers have located in Québec because of the low Canadian dollar, as well as provincial and federal tax incentives. The industry in which they participate has become technically competitive, producing films of the same quality as those produced in Hollywood. The rise of the Canadian dollar, the introduction of tax incentives in American states rivalling those available in Québec, the decline in made-for-television movie audiences and an increase in protectionism of the American film industry have led to a decline in foreign location production in Québec.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.254

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.002

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.207 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉrudit documents and data repository (Érudit Consortium, University of Montreal)Same topicBlood disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207