MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1526551055 · doi:10.31274/etd-180810-191

The Incomplete Shield: The Distant Early Warning Line and the Struggle for Effective Continental Air Defense, 1950-1960

2011· dissertation· en· W1526551055 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Samuel Edward Twitchell

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntelligence, Security, War Strategy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShieldLine (geometry)AeronauticsWarning systemHistoryPolitical scienceGeologyComputer securityMeteorologyGeographyForensic engineeringEngineeringComputer scienceTelecommunicationsPaleontologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Distant Early Warning Line was a chain of radar stations built by the United States along the north shore of North America. The DEW Line was the result of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's 1952 Lincoln Laboratory Summer Study Group, which first conceived of the DEW Line as a radar detection and tracking system designed to help protect the United States and Canada from attack by Soviet bomber aircraft. Considered a technological feat at the time it was completed in 1957, the DEW Line implemented many new radar, signal processing and communications technologies. However, the DEW Line as constructed differed substantially for the original proposal, limiting the effectiveness of its air defense function. After 1957, tests of the system raised doubts about its effectiveness. As the missile age dawned and bombers faded as the primary Soviet threat, the DEW Line became only one of several systems designed to detect a Soviet nuclear attack against North America.

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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.285 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIntelligence, Security, War StrategyFrench-language works237,207