MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7164034135 · doi:10.82465/143

Assembling the shards: Autoethnographic participatory filmmaking as a tool for migrant self-representation in Canada's "cultural mosaic"

2025· other· en· W7164034135 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Fausto Llampallas Iturriría

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Regina
KeywordsFilmmakingCitizen journalismDocumentary filmRepresentation (politics)Participatory action researchField (mathematics)Point (geometry)Film director

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Assembling the Shards is an autoethnographic participatory documentary film project that tackles the issue of migrant representation by recruiting three participants who learned about the process of filmmaking and created their own documentary short films that tell their personal stories, in addition to a short film done by myself. The participants learned about documentary filmmaking through a series of workshops that allowed them to acquire both practical and theoretical knowledge. My MFA project was planned and informed by the theories, methods and authors that are presented in this engagement paper, as well as the artists working in a similar fashion in the field of participatory documentary who have influenced my vision. The objective of this endeavour is not only to produce a compilation of films that serve as a more encompassing and authentic representation of the migrant’s experience in Canada but also to serve as a methodological reference point for future creators who might be interested in developing a collaborative project with similar characteristics.

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)0.006
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.578
Threshold uncertainty score0.839

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0200.011
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designQualitative
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 venueOpen MIND→French-language works237,207→