MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7067666852

The Multicultural State: Hypothesis for Framing a Concept

2023· article· en· W7067666852 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueArTS Archivio della ricerca di Trieste (University of Trieste https://www.units.it/) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLaser-Plasma Interactions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticulturalismOptimal distinctiveness theoryFraming (construction)EurocentrismColonialismCultural group selection
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The contribution focuses on framings of the concept of the multicultural state. Only in recent times have certain questions prompted a re-thinking of previous definitions of the dogmatic category of state. The difficulty of tracing practical aspects back to theoretical models has led to seeing the multicultural state as an advanced and emancipated form when compared to other concepts of state. Beyond the self-qualification as a multicultural state, specific national experiences have been assumed as models for the determination of constituent phenomena based on multiculturalism. The essay thus examines a few prototypes of genetically multicultural states. On the one hand, India, whose distinctiveness lies in a non-Western anticipatory multicultural constitutionalism. On the other hand, it will be analyzed those legal orders that share a common historical experience (Commonwealth of Nations), whose Western colonial heritage has remained the constitutive basis of the post-colonial experience; namely, Canada, the United States of America, Australia, and New Zealand.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.051
Scholarly communication0.0090.012
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.240
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 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArTS Archivio della ricerca di Trieste (University of Trieste https://www.units.it/)Same topicLaser-Plasma Interactions and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207