MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7161694879 · doi:10.3138/cjfms-2023-0041

Contemporary Latinx-Canadian and Latinx-Québecois Cinemas: A Diasporic Gaze

2025· article· en· W7161694879 on OpenAlexaffabout
Zaira Zarza

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Film and Media Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCinema and Media Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLiminalityGazeLatin AmericansPerspective (graphical)Space (punctuation)Diaspora

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article provides an approach to the work of contemporary Latin American diasporic filmmakers working in English Canada and Quebec. Latinx-Canadian filmmakers are first- and second-generation Latin American migrants who produce films while living as permanent or temporary residents in Canada. The unique perspective of their work comes from the liminal space between the different cultures they inhabit and helps define a new and understudied chapter in the history of Canadian national cinema(s). Through the analysis of two semi-autoreferential cinematic journeys as case studies, the Spanish-language films Mis dos voces (My Two Voices) and Roads in February, it argues that Latinx-Canadian filmmakers develop and engage with a diasporic gaze in their work. This gaze corresponds to a particular way of understanding, seeing, and being in the world with an awareness of the struggles linked to migrants’ lived experiences. In exploring violence, grief, and migration, these films contribute an alternative linguistic and ideo-aesthetic approach to reshaping the contested notion of a singular Canadian national cinema.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.559

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0220.010
Scholarly communication0.0080.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.187 · 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
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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Film and Media StudiesSame topicCinema and Media StudiesFrench-language works237,207