MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1509720215

The Industrialization of Tree Harvesting Systems in the Eastern Canadian Forest, 1955-1995

2006· article· en· W1509720215 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Peter MacDonald, Michael Clow

Bibliographic record

VenueLabour / Le Travail · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicForest Biomass Utilization and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClearcuttingLoggingIndustrialisationMechanizationCITESFactory (object-oriented programming)Work (physics)Economic historyForestryGeographyAgroforestryArchaeologyHistoryPolitical scienceEngineeringEnvironmental scienceFishery
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1 Richard A. Rajala, Forest as Factory: Technological Change and Worker Control in the West Coast Industry, 1880-1930, Labour/Le Travail, 32 (Fall 1993), 73-104, and Richard A. Rajala, Clearcutting the Pacific Rain Forest: Production, Science, and Reg ulation (Vancouver 1998). To the sources he cites in Clearcutting, xx, we would add the following which deal specifi cally with the history of mechanization: C.R. Silversides (accompanying essay by Richard A. Rajala), Broadaxe to Flying Shear: The Mechanization of Forest Harvesting East of the Rockies (Ottawa 1997); C.R. Silversides, Logging Mechanization in Eastern Canada, un published and undated manuscript, Forest Engineering Research Institute of Canada [FERIC] Library, L/C SD 388 S561; and Ken Drushka and Hannu Konttinen, Tracks in the Forest: The Evolution of Machinery (Helsinki 1997). Harry Braverman, Labour and Monopoly Capital: The Degradation of Work in the Twenti eth Century (New York 1974).

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.515

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.010
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLabour / Le TravailSame topicForest Biomass Utilization and ManagementFrench-language works237,207