MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7161968877 · doi:10.82308/16616

"No one's free who isn't free to love": love and history across Canadian boundaries in George Elliot Clarke's «Beatrice Chancy» and «Québécité: A Jazz Fantasia in Three Cantos»

2008· dissertation· en· W7161968877 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Julie Claire Peters

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLiterature, Musicology, and Cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeorge (robot)JazzCriticismPopular cultureMemoir

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Précis Beatrice Chancy (1999), l'opéra par George Elliott Clarke, est l'histoire de la fille d'une esclave Noire et de son maître Blanc dans la Nouvelle Ecosse de 1801. Adressant l'ignorance qu'ont plusieurs Canadiens de l'esclavage pratiquée au Canada entre 1689 et 1834, la pièce démontre comment se pervertit l'amour dans une société où un corps peut être une commodité. Québécité (2003), d'autre part, met en scène deux couples de races mixtes qui se marient dans la Ville de Québec contemporaine. L'histoire est également l'utopie de Clarke et le rêve de Beatrice: une monde où l'amour est possible à travers toutes frontières historiques et culturelles. Cette utopie tant informée par l'éthique multi-culturelle Canadienne est très problématique, spécialement mise en vue de son engagement avec la dynamique culturelle et historique du Québec au sein du Canada. À travers leurs manifestations dramatiques, les deux pièces invitent une communauté inclusive de Canadiens à discuter les problèmes abordés, sans exiger leur résolution.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.773

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0570.036
Scholarly communication0.0110.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.242 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLiterature, Musicology, and Cultural Analysis→French-language works237,207→