MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7019676067

History on the Web / L’Histoire sur la toile

2019· article· en· W7019676067 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueÉrudit documents and data repository (Érudit Consortium, University of Montreal) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInjusticeAthletesWhite (mutation)Ethnic groupRacismRace (biology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sports headlines over the past few years remind us of the ways\nthat race and sports intersect in both the past and the present.\nWillie O’Ree’s induction into the Hockey Hall of Fame, NFL\nplayer protests, and ethnic slurs hurled at First Nations hockey\nplayers, among others, all suggest that sports can offer insights\ninto racial injustice in society, as well as the fight against it. Over\nthe past three years, I have been part of a university-community\ngroup that has developed a website and public history project to\nhelp students explore these issues. In June, 2017, we launched\n“Breaking the Colour Barrier: Wilfred “Boomer” Harding and\nthe Chatham Coloured All-Stars” (http://cdigs.uwindsor.ca/\nBreakingColourBarrier/). In 1934, the All-Stars were the first\namateur Black baseball team to win a provincial championship\nin the predominantly white Ontario Baseball Association. Like\nmany athletes from historically-marginalized communities, the\nplayers regularly faced racial and economic barriers playing\nball in 1930s southern Ontario. While their descendants and\ncommunity members have remembered and commemorated\nthe team’s achievements and hardships, the All-Stars’ story has\nreceived little attention outside Chatham.

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)0.003
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 score0.240
Threshold uncertainty score0.804

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2400.092

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.181 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉrudit documents and data repository (Érudit Consortium, University of Montreal)→Same topicCanadian Identity and History→French-language works237,207→